• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Why Should You Support SAGES?
    • SAGES Swag
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Annual Meeting
      • 2027 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2027 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Lead Up Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • Innovative Surgical Trends
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Advanced Laparoscopy and Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
    • Foregut Video Atlas
  • Opportunities
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs
  • Learning Hub
You are here: Home / Abstracts / PATIENT RECOVERY AFTER MAJOR GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY: IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MINIMALLY INVASIVE AND OPEN APPROACHES?

PATIENT RECOVERY AFTER MAJOR GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY: IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MINIMALLY INVASIVE AND OPEN APPROACHES?

Cornelius A Thiels, DO, MBA, Kristine T Hanson, MPH, Kellie L Mathis, MD, Paul J Novotny, MS, Mark J Truty, MD, MS, Jeff A Sloan, PhD, Juliane Bingener, MD. Mayo Clinic

Objectives: Patients define recovery from surgery as return to normal function; however, little data exist about return to normal after major gastrointestinal surgery. We compared recovery after MIS and open GI surgery using NIH endorsed Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) tools.

Methods: Patients scheduled for open or MIS GI surgery (pancreaticoduodenectomy, esophagectomy, colectomy, and proctectomy) were enrolled in a prospective study. Demographics, complications, and PRO were collected using validated PROMIS and LASA scales pre-operatively, post-operative day (POD) 2, 7, 14, 30, and monthly until 6 months post-op. Patients were asked if they had fully recovered. Comparison between approaches was performed in a treatment-received analysis using Area Under the Curve (AUC) and multivariable mixed-effects repeated measures models controlling for covariates. Return to baseline was defined as PRO scores within ½ SD of baseline. Initial 30-day outcomes are reported here. 

Results: Of 340 enrolled patients (median age 60 years, 44% women), 158 underwent open and 182 MIS procedures, including 125 pancreaticoduodenectomies, 20 esophagectomies, 153 colectomies, and 42 proctectomies. Mortality was 0.9% and 19% had grade ≥III complication. Patients undergoing open surgery tended to be older, had greater ASA scores, and were more likely to have cancer (all p<0.05 vs. MIS). All patients experienced significant decline by POD 2; PRO scores were significantly better in MIS patients throughout the 30 post-operative days (Figure). PROMIS Physical T and LASA QOL scores returned to baseline in 42% and 54% of patients at 30-days, respectively (PROMIS Physical T score: 52% MIS vs 31% open, p<0.001; LASA QOL:  62% MIS vs 44% open, p=0.001). At 30 days 20% of all patients reported feeling recovered (14% open vs 25% MIS, p=0.02). On multivariable analysis, improvement in PRO scores over time varied by approach, where MIS was associated with a slightly higher PROMIS Physical T score at each time point (estimate 1.75 higher, p=0.002 vs open at 30 days) and LASA QOL score at each time point (estimate 0.56 higher, p=0.03 vs open at 30 days).

Conclusion: All patients had a significant drop in PRO measures immediately after surgery with about half returning to baseline by 30 days.  Only 1/5 patients felt recovered. QOL was slightly better at 30 days in MIS patients compared to open surgery; longer follow-up may better delineate patient recovery.


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 94670

Program Number: S158

Presentation Session: OR Efficiency & Outcomes

Presentation Type: Podium

Related



Hours & Info

15821 Ventura Blvd Ste 400
Encino, CA 91436

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2026 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals

Refine Search