Small bowel obstruction, incisional hernia and survival after laparoscopic and open colonic resection (LAFA study)


Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

72 Citations (Scopus)


Short-term advantages to laparoscopic surgery are well described. This study compared medium- to long-term outcomes of a randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open colonic resection for cancer. The case notes of patients included in the LAFA study (perioperative strategy in colonic surgery; LAparoscopy and/or FAst track multimodal management versus standard care) were reviewed 2-5 years after randomization for incisional hernia, adhesional small bowel obstruction (SBO), overall survival, cancer recurrence and quality of life (QoL). The laparoscopic and open groups were compared irrespective of fast-track or standard perioperative care. Data on incisional hernias, SBO, survival and recurrence were available for 399 of 400 patients: 208 laparoscopic and 191 open resections. These outcomes were corrected for duration of follow-up. Median follow-up was 3·4 (i.q.r. 2·6-4·4) years. Multivariable regression analysis showed that open resection was a risk factor for incisional hernia (odds ratio (OR) 2·44, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 1·12 to 5·26; P = 0·022) and SBO (OR 3·70, 1·07 to 12·50; P = 0·039). There were no differences in overall survival (hazard ratio 1·10, 95 per cent c.i. 0·67 to 1·80; P = 0·730) or in cumulative incidence of recurrence (P = 0·514) between the laparoscopic and open groups. There were no measured differences in QoL in 281 respondents (P > 0·350 for all scales). Laparoscopic colonic surgery led to fewer incisional hernia and adhesional SBO events. NTR222 (
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1153-1159
Number of pages7
JournalBritish Journal of Surgery
Issue number9
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Cite this