Literature DB >> 10816626

Single-layer continuous versus two-layer interrupted intestinal anastomosis: a prospective randomized trial.

J M Burch1, R J Franciose, E E Moore, W L Biffl, P J Offner.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the suitability of a single-layer continuous technique for intestinal anastomosis in a surgical training program. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Several recent reports have advocated the use of a continuous single-layer technique for intestinal anastomosis. Purported advantages include shorter time for construction, lower cost, and perhaps a lower rate of anastomotic leakage. The authors hypothesized that the single-layer continuous anastomosis could be safely introduced into a surgical training program and that it could be performed in less time and at a lower cost than the two-layer interrupted anastomosis.
METHODS: The study was conducted during a 3-year period ending September 1999. All adult patients requiring intestinal anastomosis were considered eligible. Patients who required anastomosis to the stomach, duodenum, and rectum were excluded. Patients were also excluded if the surgeon did not believe either technique could be used. Patients were randomly assigned to one- or two-layer techniques. Single-layer anastomoses were performed with a continuous 3-0 polypropylene suture. Two-layer anastomoses were constructed using interrupted 3-0 silk Lembert sutures for the outer layer and a continuous 3-0 polyglycolic acid suture for the inner layer. The time for anastomosis began with the placement of the first stitch and ended when the last stitch was cut. Anastomotic leak was defined as radiographic demonstration of a fistula or nonabsorbable material draining from a wound after oral administration, or visible disruption of the suture line during reexploration.
RESULTS: Sixty-five single-layer and 67 two-layer anastomoses were performed. The groups were evenly matched according to age, sex, diagnosis, and location of the anastomosis. Two leaks (3.1%) occurred in the single-layer group and one (1.5%) in the two-layer group. Two abscesses (3.0%) occurred in each group. A mean of 20.8 minutes was required to construct a single-layer anastomosis versus 30.7 minutes for the two-layer technique. Mean length of stay was 7.9 days for single-layer patients and 9.9 days for two-layer patients; this difference did not quite reach statistical significance. Cost of materials was $4.61 for the single-layer technique and $35.38 for the two-layer method.
CONCLUSIONS: A single-layer continuous anastomosis can be constructed in significantly less time and with a similar rate of complications compared with the two-layer technique. It also costs less than any other method and can be incorporated into a surgical training program without a significant increase in complications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10816626      PMCID: PMC1421072          DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200006000-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  19 in total

1.  Ten years' experience with a single layer anastomosis in colon surgery.

Authors:  L P GAMBEE; W GARNJOBST; C E HARDWICK
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1956-08       Impact factor: 2.565

2.  Single layer anastomosis in the upper gastrointestinal tract.

Authors:  S T Irwin; Z H Krukowski; N A Matheson
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 6.939

3.  A retrospective study of colostomies, leaks and strictures after colorectal anastomosis.

Authors:  J R Tuson; W G Everett
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Single-layer end-on continuous suture of colonic anastomoses.

Authors:  F Harder; P Vogelbach
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  [Gastrointestinal suturing. Apropos of 570 sutures performed over a 5-year period using a single layer continuous technic].

Authors:  P Hautefeuille
Journal:  Chirurgie       Date:  1976-02

6.  Single-layer polypropylene colorectal anastomosis. Experience with 100 cases.

Authors:  H R Bailey; J W LaVoo; E Max; K W Smith; D R Butts; J M Hampton
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 4.585

7.  Single-layer continuous colorectal anastomosis.

Authors:  H R Bailey; J W LaVoo; E Max; K W Smith; J M Hampton
Journal:  Aust N Z J Surg       Date:  1981-10

8.  Anastomotic integrity after operations for large-bowel cancer: a multicentre study.

Authors:  L P Fielding; S Stewart-Brown; L Blesovsky; G Kearney
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1980-08-09

9.  Single-layer open gastrointestinal anastomosis.

Authors:  A W Bronwell; R Rutledge; M L Dalton
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1967-06       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Continuous single-layer gastrointestinal anastomosis: a prospective audit.

Authors:  S Sarin; R G Lightwood
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 6.939

View more
  26 in total

Review 1.  Management of peritonitis in the critically ill patient.

Authors:  Carlos A Ordoñez; Juan Carlos Puyana
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.741

Review 2.  [Anastomotic techniques for the gastrointestinal tract].

Authors:  M G Laukötter; N Senninger
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 0.955

3.  [Anastomotic leakage following bowel resections for colon cancer: multivariate analysis of risk factors].

Authors:  R Kube; P Mroczkowski; R Steinert; M Sahm; U Schmidt; I Gastinger; H Lippert
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 0.955

4.  The handsewn anastomosis after colon resection due to colonic cancer.

Authors:  M G Pramateftakis; G Vrakas; P Hatzigianni; T Tsachalis; I Matzoros; E Christoforidis; D Raptis; G Roidos; C Lazaridis
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.781

5.  A new direction in anastomotic research: should we redesign the 'angle of sorrow'?

Authors:  Omar E Aly
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-12-12       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 6.  [Surgical management of abdominal injury].

Authors:  G Matthes; K Bauwens; A Ekkernkamp; D Stengel
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 1.000

7.  Pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a comparison between the two pancreaticojejunostomy methods for approximating the pancreatic parenchyma to the jejunal seromuscular layer: interrupted vs continuous stitches.

Authors:  Seung-Eun Lee; Sung-Hoon Yang; Jin-Young Jang; Sun-Whe Kim
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-10-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 8.  Anastomoses of the lower gastrointestinal tract.

Authors:  Govind Nandakumar; Sharon L Stein; Fabrizio Michelassi
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2009-11-03       Impact factor: 46.802

9.  Single layered intestinal anastomosis: a safe and economic technique.

Authors:  Kirti Garude; Chetan Tandel; Sandeep Rao; Nimish J Shah
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2012-04-19       Impact factor: 0.656

10.  Hanging by a thread: the long-term efficacy and safety of transscleral sutured intraocular lenses in children (an American Ophthalmological Society thesis).

Authors:  Edward G Buckley
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2007
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.