Literature DB >> 12436148

Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Suzana Angélica da Silva Lustosa1, Delcio Matos, Alvaro Nagib Atallah, Aldemar Araujo Castro.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: The interest in the results from comparisons between handsewing and stapling in colorectal anastomoses has been reflected in the progressive increase in the number of clinical trials. These studies, however, do not permit conclusions to be drawn, given the lack of statistical power of the samples analyzed.
OBJECTIVE: To compare stapling and handsewing in colorectal anastomosis, testing the hypothesis that in colorectal anastomosis the technique of stapling is superior to that of handsewing.
DESIGN: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. SURVEY STRATEGY: Systematic revision of the literature and meta-analysis were used, without restrictions on language, dates or other considerations. The sources of information used were Embase, Lilacs, Medline, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Database, and letters to authors and industrial producers of staples and thread. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were included in accordance with randomization criteria. The external validity of the studies was investigated via the characteristics of the participants, the interventions and the variables analyzed. An independent selection of clinical studies focusing on analysis of adult patients attended to on an elective basis was made by two reviewers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by the same reviewers. In addition to the randomization criteria, the masking, treatment intention, losses and exclusions were also analyzed. The meta-analysis was performed using risk difference and weighted average difference, with their respective 95% confidence intervals. The variables studied were mortality, clinical and radiological anastomotic dehiscence, anastomotic stricture, hemorrhage, reoperation, wound infection, time taken to perform the anastomosis and hospital stay.
RESULTS: Nine clinical trials were selected. After verifying that it was possible to perform one of the two techniques being compared, 1,233 patients were included, of whom 622 underwent stapling and 611 the handsewing technique. No statistical difference was found between the variables, except for stenosis, which was more frequent in stapling (p < 0.05), and the time taken to perform the anastomosis, which was greater in handsewing (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The evidence found was insufficient to demonstrate superiority of the stapling method over handsewing, independent of the level of colorectal anastomosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12436148     DOI: 10.1590/s1516-31802002000500002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sao Paulo Med J        ISSN: 1516-3180            Impact factor:   1.044


  32 in total

1.  Predictors for complications after loop stoma closure in patients with rectal cancer.

Authors:  Herwig Pokorny; Harald Herkner; Raimund Jakesz; Friedrich Herbst
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Comparison of effects in randomized controlled trials with observational studies in digestive surgery.

Authors:  Satoru Shikata; Takeo Nakayama; Yoshinori Noguchi; Yoshinori Taji; Hisakazu Yamagishi
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Comparative Study between Staplers and Conventional(Hand-Sewn) Anastomosis in Gastrointestinal Surgery.

Authors:  Himabindu Bangaru; Rama Mohan Rao Veitla; Mythili Pigilam; Girish Kumar Kunwargiri
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2012-03-23       Impact factor: 0.656

4.  [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

5.  Protection of intestinal anastomosis with biological glues: an experimental randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  S Giuratrabocchetta; M Rinaldi; F Cuccia; M Lemma; D Piscitelli; P Polidoro; D F Altomare
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2011-01-25       Impact factor: 3.781

6.  Higher frequency of anastomotic leakage with stapled compared to hand-sewn ileocolic anastomosis in a large population-based study.

Authors:  Pontus Gustafsson; Pia Jestin; Ulf Gunnarsson; Ulrik Lindforss
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Fashioning enterotomy closure after totally laparoscopic ileocolic anastomosis for right colon cancer: a multicenter experience.

Authors:  M Milone; U Elmore; M E Allaix; P P Bianchi; A Biondi; L Boni; U Bracale; E Cassinotti; G Ceccarelli; F Corcione; D Cuccurullo; M Degiuli; Nicolò De Manzini; D D'Ugo; G Formisano; M Manigrasso; M Morino; S Palmisano; R Persiani; R Reddavid; F Rondelli; N Velotti; R Rosati; Giovanni Domenico De Palma
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-04-22       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  A systematic analysis of controlled clinical trials using the NiTi CAR™ compression ring in colorectal anastomoses.

Authors:  R Tabola; R Cirocchi; A Fingerhut; A Arezzo; J Randolph; V Grassi; G A Binda; V D'Andrea; I Abraha; G Popivanov; S Di Saverio; A Zbar
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2017-01-28       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 9.  [Surgical management of abdominal injury].

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

10.  Complications in colorectal surgery: risk factors and preventive strategies.

Authors:  Philipp Kirchhoff; Pierre-Alain Clavien; Dieter Hahnloser
Journal:  Patient Saf Surg       Date:  2010-03-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.