Laparoscopic second look operation for XXXX : single center experiences.

@entity43 @entity1
We compared the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic surgery with those of laparotomy in second-look operations for @entity43 . We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 35 @entity1 treated between January 2000 and December 2005. They were categorized into two groups: Laparoscopy versus laparotomy group. Among 35 @entity1 , 18 @entity1 (51.4%) were treated with laparoscopy, and 17 @entity1 (48.6%) were treated with laparotomy. There were no statistically significant differences except for hospital stay (laparoscopy vs. laparotomy five days vs. nine days, p < 0.05). Eight @entity1 (44.4%) in the laparoscopy group and six (35.3%) in the laparotomy group were found to be pathologically positive after the second look operation. There were two recurrences (20.0%) in the laparoscopy group and four (36.4%) in the laparotomy group pathologically negative in the second-look operation (p = 0.557). There were no differences in disease-free survival rates (p = 0.705) between the two groups. The second look operation is an ideal method for histologic comfirmation of recurrent or persistent @entity43 . Laparoscopic surgery seems a safe and accurate method for the second-look examination, and can also reduce @entity1 discomfort, hospital stay and morbidity associated with laparotomy.
