Surgical Management of Pediatric Adhesive Bowel Obstruction

1 Baystate Pediatric Surgery, Baystate Children's Hospital, Tufts University School of Medicine , Springfield, Massachusetts.
Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques (Impact Factor: 1.34). 06/2012; 22(9). DOI: 10.1089/lap.2012.0069
Source: PubMed


The objective of this study was to analyze a population-based database for recent trends in surgical management of pediatric adhesive bowel obstruction and compare open versus laparoscopic lysis of adhesions (LOA).

Subjects and methods:
Pediatric adhesive bowel obstruction cases were identified in the Kids' Inpatients Database from 1997, 2000, 2003, 2006, and 2009. Data analysis included patients' demographics, hospital variables, length of stay (LOS), and total hospital charges (THC). Complications analysis included postoperative shock, hemorrhage, hematoma, seroma, wound complications, infection, fistula, and pulmonary complications.

In total, 20,679 pediatric adhesive bowel obstruction cases were identified during the study period. These were characterized by a median age of 11 years old, with 59.0% of the population female. Overall treatment included 88.6% open and 11.4% laparoscopic LOA. A more than twofold increase in utilization of laparoscopy was observed from 7.2% in 1997 to 17.2% in 2009 (P<.001). Complication rates were lower for laparoscopic LOA versus open (5.6% versus 10.4%; odds ratio 0.512; 95% confidence interval 0.394-0.667; P<.001), especially accidental puncture or laceration rate (2.2% versus 3.9%; odds ratio 0.566; 95% confidence interval 0.375-0.854; P=.006). Conversion to open LOA occurred in 1.9%. Laparoscopy was associated with a shorter median LOS (6 versus 8 days; P<.001) and a lower mean THC ($38,241.11 versus $48,552.51; P<.001) compared with open LOA. Multivariate regression analysis did not find hospital bed size, location, teaching status, and regions to be statistically significant predictors for utilization of laparoscopy.

Laparoscopic LOA is a safe option for pediatric adhesive bowel obstruction with lower complication rates and a reduced economic burden. Despite the increase in utilization of laparoscopy in recent years, only a minority of patients underwent laparoscopic LOA. Further studies are needed to identify and characterize the subgroup of patients who benefit from laparoscopic LOA.

10 Reads
  • Source
    Surgical Endoscopy 08/2013; 27(10). DOI:10.1007/s00464-013-2891-x · 3.26 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The formation of adhesions after abdominal surgery can lead to increased morbidity in children, increases the incidence of readmission, and may pose a significant challenge to subsequent surgical care over their lifetime. As the pathophysiology of peritoneal adhesion formation has been better understood, preventive strategies that minimize surgical trauma and contamination have been sought. Laparoscopy, over the past few decades, has become an increasingly utilized approach for many pediatric surgical problems and intuitively should have an advantage over open surgery in reducing adhesion formation. In this review, we examine the utility of laparoscopy in both the prevention and treatment of intraabdominal adhesive disease in children.
    Seminars in Pediatric Surgery 06/2014; 23(6). DOI:10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2014.06.007 · 2.22 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background/Aim Paediatric surgical practice should be based upon solid scientific evidence. A study in 1998 (Baraldini et al., Pediatr Surg Int) indicated that only a quarter of paediatric operations were supported by the then gold standard of evidence based medicine (EBM) which was defined by randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The aim of the current study was to re-evaluate paediatric surgical practice 16 years after the previous study in a larger cohort of patients. Methods A prospective observational study was performed in a tertiary level teaching hospital for children. The study was approved by the local research ethics board. All diagnostic and therapeutic procedures requiring a general anaesthetic carried out over a 4-week period (24 Feb 2014–22 Mar 2014) under the general surgery service or involving a general paediatric surgeon were included in the study. Pubmed and EMBASE were used to search in the literature for the highest level of evidence supporting the recorded procedures. Evidence was classified according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (OCEBM) 2009 system as well as according to the classification used by Baraldini et al. Results was compared using Χ 2 test. P
    Pediatric Surgery International 11/2014; 31(1). DOI:10.1007/s00383-014-3624-5 · 1.00 Impact Factor