Literature DB >> 11791061

Handsewn versus stapled anastomosis in penetrating colon injuries requiring resection: a multicenter study.

Demetrios Demetriades1, James A Murray, Linda S Chan, C Ordoñez, D Bowley, Kimberly K Nagy, Edward E Cornwell, George C Velmahos, N Muñoz, C Hatzitheofilou, C William Schwab, Aurelio Rodriguez, C Cornejo, Kimberly A Davis, Nicholas Namias, David H Wisner, Rao R Ivatury, Ernest E Moore, Jose A Acosta, Kimball I Maull, Michael H Thomason, David A Spain.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although the use of stapling devices in elective colon surgery has been shown to be as safe as handsewn techniques, there have been concerns about their safety in emergency trauma surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare stapled with handsewn colonic anastomosis following penetrating trauma.
METHODS: This was a prospective multicenter study and included patients who underwent colon resection and anastomosis following penetrating trauma. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors for abdominal complications and compare outcomes between stapled and handsewn repairs.
RESULTS: Two hundred seven patients underwent colon resection and primary anastomosis. In 128 patients (61.8%) the anastomosis was performed with handsewing and in the remaining 79 (38.2%) with stapling devices. There were no colon-related deaths and the overall incidence of colon-related abdominal complications was 22.7% (26.6% in the stapled group and 20.3% in the handsewn group, p = 0.30). The incidence of anastomotic leak was 6.3% in the stapled group and 7.8% in the handsewn group (p = 0.69). Multivariate analysis adjusting for blood transfusions, fecal contamination, and type of antibiotic prophylaxis showed that the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of complications in the stapled group was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.38-1.74, p = 0.63). In a second multivariate analysis adjusting for blood transfusions, hypotension, fecal contamination, Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Index, and preoperative delays the adjusted OR in the stapled group was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.46-2.11, p = 0.99).
CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that the method of anastomosis following colon resection for penetrating trauma does not affect the incidence of abdominal complications and the choice should be surgeon's preference.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11791061     DOI: 10.1097/00005373-200201000-00020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Trauma        ISSN: 0022-5282


  18 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 disruption after large bowel resection.

Authors:  Mohammad U Nasirkhan; Farshad Abir; Walter Longo; Robert Kozol
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-04-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 3.  Evidence-based management of colorectal trauma.

Authors:  Eric K Johnson; Scott R Steele
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Enterocutaneous fistulas in the setting of trauma and critical illness.

Authors:  Joseph J Dubose; Jonathan B Lundy
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2010-09

5.  Bowel anastomoses: The theory, the practice and the evidence base.

Authors:  Frances Goulder
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-09-27

6.  Predictive Factors for Small Intestinal and Colonic Anastomotic Leak: a Multivariate Analysis.

Authors:  Ahmad Sakr; Sameh Hany Emile; Emad Abdallah; Waleed Thabet; Wael Khafagy
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2016-10-17       Impact factor: 0.656

Review 7.  [Surgical management of abdominal injury].

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

Review 8.  Damage control surgical management of combined small and large bowel injuries in penetrating trauma: Are ostomies still pertinent?

Authors:  Carlos A Ordoñez; Michael W Parra; Yaset Caicedo; Natalia Padilla; Edison Angamarca; José Julián Serna; Fernando Rodríguez-Holguín; Alberto García; Alexander Salcedo; Luis Fernando Pino; Adolfo González-Hadad; Mario Alain Herrera; Laureano Quintero; Fabian Hernández; María Josefa Franco; Gonzalo Aristizábal; Luis Eduardo Toro; Mónica Guzmán-Rodríguez; Federico Coccolini; Ricardo Ferrada; Rao Ivatury
Journal:  Colomb Med (Cali)       Date:  2021-04-27

Review 9.  Historical and current trends in colon trauma.

Authors:  Marlin Wayne Causey; David E Rivadeneira; Scott R Steele
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2012-12

Review 10.  Colon Trauma: Evidence-Based Practices.

Authors:  Ryo Yamamoto; Alicia J Logue; Mark T Muir
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2017-12-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.