Laparoscopic surgery can be difficult in patients with IBD who have fragile tissue, thickened mesentery, dense adhesions, multiple lesions, malnutrition, or immunosuppression. Despite these concerns, several early publications reported the advantages of laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery in patients with IBD. Laparoscopy is more widely used in patients with CD than UC. In recent years, with the advent of newer laparoscopic instruments and advances in physician techniques, laparoscopy has been used more often in patients with IBD, especially in those requiring complex surgery. 1. Ileocolic resection: Despite the lack of data from randomized controlled studies, there is a large body of literature that identifies the advantages of laparoscopy over open surgery for ileocolic resection. One study including 60 patients showed better postoperative pulmonary function, lower complication rates, and shorter hospital stays in the laparoscopic group. Similar results were obtained in other studies, with laparoscopic patients recovering faster from postoperative bowel function and requiring significantly less postoperative pain and analgesia. These advantages allow for earlier discharge and reduced costs. However, when comparing fully laparoscopic surgery with laparoscopic-assisted surgery, there were no significant differences in terms of operative time and cost. The advantages of laparoscopic surgery in reducing bleeding, incisional infections, abdominal abscesses, and postoperative bowel obstruction have also been reported in the literature, but they are short-term results and need to be confirmed by further studies. Future studies of laparoscopic surgery need to focus on long-term patient benefits and the impact on postoperative patient quality of life, for which data are still scarce. The rate of laparoscopic conversion to open in ileocolic resection is approximately 0%-7%. Risk factors for intermediate open abdomen include endovascular fistula, abdominal mass, recurrent CD, hormone use, and preoperative malnutrition. 2, small bowel resection: laparoscopic surgery is simpler, but requires careful examination of the entire small bowel. 3, Stoma: Laparoscopic ileostomy or colostomy has all the advantages mentioned above and no incisions other than the stoma and perforation holes. 4. Colectomy: Segmental colectomy for isolated lesions and colorectal resection + ileorectal anastomosis for total colitis can be done laparoscopically. Laparoscopic surgery has a shorter hospital stay than open surgery and resumes activities and work earlier after surgery. 5. Laparoscopic surgery for complex CD Laparoscopic surgery for complex CD (including recurrent lesions, fistulas, abscesses, cellulitis, etc.) can be a challenge even for the most experienced surgeons. Factors that can lead to an intermediate laparotomy include intraoperative bowel injury, fistulas especially involving the duodenum or vagina. However, the incidence of complications is not increased by the conversion of the abdomen. 6, laparoscopic surgery for UC The laparoscopic surgery for UC has less relevant experience than CD because of the complexity of the procedure. The short-term advantages of laparoscopic surgery for total colectomy over open surgery include: fewer days of hospitalization, less intraoperative bleeding, and faster recovery of gastrointestinal function, even for refractory acute severe colitis these advantages also exist. For UC where medical treatment is not effective, IPAA surgery is already the standard procedure. Laparoscopic IPAA is being performed in high-volume centers and can be divided into fully laparoscopic and laparoscopically assisted. In terms of short-term results, there is no significant difference between fully laparoscopic surgery and laparoscopic-assisted.