INTRODUCTION: The addition of staple-line reinforcements on circular anastomoses has not been well studied. We histologically and mechanically analyzed circular- stapled anastomoses with and without bioabsorbable staple-line reinforcement (SeamGuard, W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, AZ) in a porcine model. METHODS: Gastrojejunal anastomoses were constructed using a #25 EEA Proximate ILS (Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Cincinnati, OH) mechanical stapling device with and without Bioabsorbable SeamGuard (BSG). Gastrojejunal anastomoses were resected acutely and at 1 week, and burst-pressure testing and histological analysis were performed. Standardized grading systems for inflammation, collagen deposition, vascularity, and serosal inflammation were used to compare the two anastomosis types. RESULTS: Acute burst pressures were significantly higher with BSG than with staples alone (1.37 versus 0.39 psi, p=0.0075). Burst pressures at 1 week were significantly lower with BSG than with staples alone (2.24 versus 3.86 psi, p=0.0353); however, both readings were above normal physiologic intestinal pressures. There was no statistical difference in inflammation (13.4 versus 15.6, p=0.073), width of mucosa (3.2 mm versus 3.2 mm, p=0.974), adhesion formation (0 versus 0.5, p=0.575), number of blood vessels (0.5 versus 1.0, p=0.056), or serosal inflammation (2.0 versus 1.0, p=0.27) between the stapled anastomoses and those buttressed with BSG. Stapled-only anastomoses had statistically more collagen (2.0 versus 1.0, p=0.005) than the anastomoses supported with BSG. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of BSG as a staple-line reinforcement acutely improves the burst strength of a circular anastomosis but not at 1 week. At 1 week, a decrease in collagen content with the BSG-buttressed stapled anastomosis was the only difference in the histologic parameters studied with no difference in vascularity, adhesions, or inflammation. The long-term effect of BSG on anastomotic strength or scarring is yet to be determined. The clinical implications may include decreased stricture formation and also decreased strength at anastomoses.
INTRODUCTION: The addition of staple-line reinforcements on circular anastomoses has not been well studied. We histologically and mechanically analyzed circular- stapled anastomoses with and without bioabsorbable staple-line reinforcement (SeamGuard, W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, AZ) in a porcine model. METHODS: Gastrojejunal anastomoses were constructed using a #25 EEA Proximate ILS (Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Cincinnati, OH) mechanical stapling device with and without Bioabsorbable SeamGuard (BSG). Gastrojejunal anastomoses were resected acutely and at 1 week, and burst-pressure testing and histological analysis were performed. Standardized grading systems for inflammation, collagen deposition, vascularity, and serosal inflammation were used to compare the two anastomosis types. RESULTS: Acute burst pressures were significantly higher with BSG than with staples alone (1.37 versus 0.39 psi, p=0.0075). Burst pressures at 1 week were significantly lower with BSG than with staples alone (2.24 versus 3.86 psi, p=0.0353); however, both readings were above normal physiologic intestinal pressures. There was no statistical difference in inflammation (13.4 versus 15.6, p=0.073), width of mucosa (3.2 mm versus 3.2 mm, p=0.974), adhesion formation (0 versus 0.5, p=0.575), number of blood vessels (0.5 versus 1.0, p=0.056), or serosal inflammation (2.0 versus 1.0, p=0.27) between the stapled anastomoses and those buttressed with BSG. Stapled-only anastomoses had statistically more collagen (2.0 versus 1.0, p=0.005) than the anastomoses supported with BSG. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of BSG as a staple-line reinforcement acutely improves the burst strength of a circular anastomosis but not at 1 week. At 1 week, a decrease in collagen content with the BSG-buttressed stapled anastomosis was the only difference in the histologic parameters studied with no difference in vascularity, adhesions, or inflammation. The long-term effect of BSG on anastomotic strength or scarring is yet to be determined. The clinical implications may include decreased stricture formation and also decreased strength at anastomoses.
Authors: Mohammed F Shamji; Donna E Maziak; Farid M Shamji; Frederick R K Matzinger; D Garth Perkins Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Marc O Schurr; Franziska E Baur; Martina Krautwald; Marion Fehlker; Manfred Wehrmann; Thomas Gottwald; Ruediger L Prosst Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-10-16 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Marcela C Ramirez; Joaquin Rodriguez; Flora Varghese; William H Atkinson; Daniel Rhodes; M Hassan Rajab; Richard Symmonds Journal: JSLS Date: 2010 Jul-Sep Impact factor: 2.172