BACKGROUND: Various devices have been developed to facilitate liver transection and reduce blood loss in liver resections. None of these has proven superiority compared with the classical clamp-crushing technique. This randomized clinical trial compared the effectiveness and safety of stapler transection with that of clamp-crushing during open liver resection. METHODS:Patients admitted for elective open liver resection between January 2010 and October 2011 were assigned randomly to stapler transection or the clamp-crushing technique. The primary endpoint was the total amount of intraoperative blood loss. Secondary endpoints included transection time, duration of operation, complication rates and resection margins. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were enrolled, 65 to clamp-crushing and 65 to stapler transection. There was no difference between groups in total intraoperative blood loss: median (i.q.r.) 1050 (525-1650) versus 925 (450-1425) ml respectively (P = 0·279). The difference in total intraoperative blood loss normalized to the transection surface area was not statistically significant (P = 0·092). Blood loss during parenchymal transection was significantly lower in the stapler transection group (P = 0·002), as were the parenchymal transection time (mean(s.d.) 30(21) versus 9(7) min for clamp-crushing and stapler transection groups respectively; P < 0·001) and total duration of operation (mean(s.d.) 221(86) versus 190(85) min; P = 0·047). There were no significant differences in postoperative morbidity (P = 0·863) or mortality (P = 0·684) between groups. CONCLUSION:Stapler transection is a safe technique but does not reduce intraoperative blood loss in elective liver resection compared with the clamp-crushing technique. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01049607 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Various devices have been developed to facilitate liver transection and reduce blood loss in liver resections. None of these has proven superiority compared with the classical clamp-crushing technique. This randomized clinical trial compared the effectiveness and safety of stapler transection with that of clamp-crushing during open liver resection. METHODS:Patients admitted for elective open liver resection between January 2010 and October 2011 were assigned randomly to stapler transection or the clamp-crushing technique. The primary endpoint was the total amount of intraoperative blood loss. Secondary endpoints included transection time, duration of operation, complication rates and resection margins. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were enrolled, 65 to clamp-crushing and 65 to stapler transection. There was no difference between groups in total intraoperative blood loss: median (i.q.r.) 1050 (525-1650) versus 925 (450-1425) ml respectively (P = 0·279). The difference in total intraoperative blood loss normalized to the transection surface area was not statistically significant (P = 0·092). Blood loss during parenchymal transection was significantly lower in the stapler transection group (P = 0·002), as were the parenchymal transection time (mean(s.d.) 30(21) versus 9(7) min for clamp-crushing and stapler transection groups respectively; P < 0·001) and total duration of operation (mean(s.d.) 221(86) versus 190(85) min; P = 0·047). There were no significant differences in postoperative morbidity (P = 0·863) or mortality (P = 0·684) between groups. CONCLUSION: Stapler transection is a safe technique but does not reduce intraoperative blood loss in elective liver resection compared with the clamp-crushing technique. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01049607 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
Authors: S Wabitsch; A Kästner; P K Haber; L Feldbrügge; T Winklmann; S Werner; J Pratschke; Moritz Schmelzle Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2019-05-07 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Arianeb Mehrabi; Katrin Hoffmann; Alexander Johannes Nagel; Omid Ghamarnejad; Elias Khajeh; Mohammad Golriz; Markus W Büchler Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2019-02-28 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Alison A Smith; Dominique J Monlezun; John Martinie; David Iannitti; Ioannis Konstantinidis; Michael Darden; Geoffrey Parker; Yuman Fong; Joseph F Buell Journal: World J Surg Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Christoph Schwarz; Daniel A Klaus; Bianca Tudor; Edith Fleischmann; Thomas Wekerle; Georg Roth; Martin Bodingbauer; Klaus Kaczirek Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-10-09 Impact factor: 3.240