Bo Chen1, Andreas Kiriakopoulos2, Dimitrios Tsakayannis2, Mitchell S Wachtel3, Dimitrios Linos2, Eldo E Frezza4. 1. Department of General Surgery, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China. 2. First Surgical Clinic, Department of Surgery, ''Hygeia'' Hospital, Athens, Greece. 3. Department of Pathology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, University of Alabama, VAMC Surgical Service 112, 700 19th Street South, Birmingham, AL, 35233, USA. eldo.frezza@ccc.uab.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is an accepted bariatric procedure, with an advantaged by a low complication rate. A feared complication is stapler line leak. Buttressing materials have been suggested as a means of reducing staple line leak rates. We analyzed the leak rates from published series to help in demonstrating a potential cause. METHODS: The study was institutional review board (IRB) approved retrospectively. A Medline search using the key words sleeve gastrectomy and bariatric surgery obtained 54 articles. Attention was restricted to 11 articles written in English that listed numbers of gastrectomy procedures and leaks. Poisson regression assessed the possibility that patients who received buttressing materials had a reduced rate of leaks. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were evaluated from Greece (15) and the United States (20); two patients developed staple line leaks that appeared to be related to problems associated with buttressing materials. Eleven prior studies and the present series yielded 1,589 procedures, 15 (0.94%) of which were complicated by leaks. The leak rate for patients who were known to have received reinforcement of some sort was 1.45 (95% confidence interval 0.41-3.43) times that for other patients. To detect a difference between 1% and 0.5% as statistically significant in 80% of cases, with a two tailed test and alpha set at 0.05, would require 9,346 procedures. CONCLUSIONS: There is no reason to believe, at this point, that reduction in leak rates occur because reinforcement is used. Because the leak rate is small, the routine reinforcement of the staple line after sleeve gastrectomy is questionable at best, although a decrease in hemorrhage has been reported.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is an accepted bariatric procedure, with an advantaged by a low complication rate. A feared complication is stapler line leak. Buttressing materials have been suggested as a means of reducing staple line leak rates. We analyzed the leak rates from published series to help in demonstrating a potential cause. METHODS: The study was institutional review board (IRB) approved retrospectively. A Medline search using the key words sleeve gastrectomy and bariatric surgery obtained 54 articles. Attention was restricted to 11 articles written in English that listed numbers of gastrectomy procedures and leaks. Poisson regression assessed the possibility that patients who received buttressing materials had a reduced rate of leaks. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were evaluated from Greece (15) and the United States (20); two patients developed staple line leaks that appeared to be related to problems associated with buttressing materials. Eleven prior studies and the present series yielded 1,589 procedures, 15 (0.94%) of which were complicated by leaks. The leak rate for patients who were known to have received reinforcement of some sort was 1.45 (95% confidence interval 0.41-3.43) times that for other patients. To detect a difference between 1% and 0.5% as statistically significant in 80% of cases, with a two tailed test and alpha set at 0.05, would require 9,346 procedures. CONCLUSIONS: There is no reason to believe, at this point, that reduction in leak rates occur because reinforcement is used. Because the leak rate is small, the routine reinforcement of the staple line after sleeve gastrectomy is questionable at best, although a decrease in hemorrhage has been reported.
Authors: David J Schultz; Karen J Brasel; Kristine S Spinelli; Jason Rasmussen; John A Weigelt Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: George A Giannopoulos; Nikolaos E Tzanakis; George E Rallis; Stamatis P Efstathiou; Christos Tsigris; Nikolaos I Nikiteas Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-04-16 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Joshua B Alley; Stephen J Fenton; Michael C Harnisch; Michael N Angeletti; Richard M Peterson Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: G Casella; E Soricelli; M Rizzello; P Trentino; F Fiocca; A Fantini; F M Salvatori; N Basso Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2009-04-21 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Hideo Takahashi; Andrew T Strong; Alfredo D Guerron; John H Rodriguez; Matthew Kroh Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-07-19 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Raquel Sánchez-Santos; Ricard Corcelles Codina; Ramon Vilallonga Puy; Salvadora Delgado Rivilla; Jose Vicente Ferrer Valls; Javier Foncillas Corvinos; Carlos Masdevall Noguera; Maria Socas Macias; Pedro Gomes; Carmen Balague Ponz; Jorge De Tomas Palacios; Sergio Ortiz Sebastian; Andres Sanchez-Pernaute; Jose Julian Puche Pla; Daniel Del Castillo Dejardin; Julen Abasolo Vega; Ester Mans Muntwyler; Ana Garcia Navarro; Carlos Duran Escribano; Norberto Cassinello Fernández; Nieves Perez Climent; Jose Antonio Gracia Solanas; Francisca Garcia-Moreno Nisa; Alberto Hernández Matias; Victor Valentí Azcarate; Jose Eduardo Perez Folques; Inmaculada Navarro Garcia; Eduardo Dominguez-Adame Lanuza; Sagrario Martinez Cortijo; Jesus González Fernández Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 4.129