Skip to main content
. 2005 Apr 20;2005(2):CD003145. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003145.pub2

Milsom 1998.

Methods RCT 
 sample size calculation; 
 intraoperative randomisation after diagnostic laparoscopy; 
 conversions analysed as 
 intention to treat
Participants n = 109 
 Inclusion: right sided or sigmoid cancer, upper rectal cancer, lower rectal cancer requiring APR. 
 Exclusion: emergency or urgent surgery, disseminated disease, infiltration of adjacent organs, tumor > 8cm in diameter, transverse or descending colon tumors, midrectal tumors, BMI > 32 kg/m², declined to participate, dense adhesions, bowel distension, pregnancy, cardiovascular problems, refusal of insurance to pay for laparoscopic surgery
Interventions laparoscopic vs. conventional 
 Conversions: adhesions 4. 
 Tumor location: ascending colon, sigmoid, upper rectum, lower rectum. 
 Type of resection: right colon 29 vs. 26, left colon and ant. rectal resection 19 vs. 24, APR 7 vs. 4. 
 Tumor stage: UICC I 10 vs. 9, 
 UICC II 13 vs. 11, UICC III 16 vs. 14, UICC IV 3 vs. 4.
Outcomes Main study criterium: pulmonary function. 
 Data given for: operative time, analgetics, duration of ileus, morbidity, hospital stay.
Notes Laparoscopic technique: gas insufflation. 
 Conventional incision: midline incision. 
 Anesthesia/Analgesia: standardized, systemic pca; 
 Analgetic drugs: morphine. 
 Evans & Pollock: Design 33, Analysis 23, 
 Presentation 18, Total 74.
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Allocation concealment? Unclear risk B ‐ Unclear