Literature DB >> 26198156

Comparison of anastomotic configuration after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy under enhanced recovery program: side-to-side versus end-to-side anastomosis.

Kang-Haeng Lee1, Sung-Min Lee2, Heung-Kwon Oh1, Soo-Young Lee1, Myong Hoon Ihn1, Duck-Woo Kim1, Sung-Bum Kang3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Stapled technique for ileocolic anastomosis is largely supported in previous studies. However, standard anastomotic configuration is not conclusive and studies are limited. This study aims to compare postoperative outcomes between side to side (S-S) and end to side (E-S) stapled anastomosis after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy underenhanced recovery program (ERP).
METHODS: Between October 2009 and November 2012, 89 patients (46 in S-S group, 43 in E-S group) who underwent laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer and managed with ERP were included in the study. Recovery time and cumulative recovery rates, the length of hospital stays, complication rates were analyzed to compare both configurations.
RESULTS: The recovery time were not different between groups (S-S group, 135 hours [84-183.5] vs E-S group, 117 hours [94-143]; P = 0.349). Difference of cumulative recovery rates were observed in postoperative day 7 (S-S group, 71.7 % vs E-S group, 93.0 %; P = 0.019). The postoperative hospital stay were shorter in E-S group (S-S, 7 days [6-9] vs E-S, 6 days [5-7]; P = 0.003). The overall complication rates were lower in E-S group (26.1 % vs 4.6 %; P = 0.008). Anastomotic leakage was not observed in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: E-S configuration after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy showed favorable outcomes under enhanced recovery program.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Enhanced recovery program; Ileocolic anastomosis; Laparoscopic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26198156     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4420-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  17 in total

Review 1.  Anaesthesia, surgery, and challenges in postoperative recovery.

Authors:  Henrik Kehlet; Jørgen B Dahl
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2003-12-06       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Comparison of early mobilization and diet rehabilitation program with conventional care after laparoscopic colon surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Taek-Gu Lee; Sung-Bum Kang; Duck-Woo Kim; Samin Hong; Seung Chul Heo; Kyu Joo Park
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.585

3.  High incidence of technical errors involving the EEA circular stapler: a single institution experience.

Authors:  Anaeze C Offodile; Daniel L Feingold; Abu Nasar; Richard L Whelan; Tracey D Arnell
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2010-02-08       Impact factor: 6.113

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

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

Review 5.  Stapled versus handsewn methods for ileocolic anastomoses.

Authors:  Pui Yee Grace Choy; Ian P Bissett; James G Docherty; Bryan R Parry; Arend Merrie; Anita Fitzgerald
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2011-09-07

Review 6.  Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery.

Authors:  Cristiane B Neutzling; Suzana A S Lustosa; Igor M Proenca; Edina M K da Silva; Delcio Matos
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-02-15

7.  Renewed assessment of the stapled anastomosis with the increasing role of laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer.

Authors:  Ramzi Amri; Liliana G Bordeianou; Patricia Sylla; David L Berger
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-12-04       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Systematic review of the technique of colorectal anastomosis.

Authors:  Juliette C Slieker; Freek Daams; Irene M Mulder; Johannes Jeekel; Johan F Lange
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 14.766

9.  Ileocolonic anastomosis: preferred techniques in 999 patients. A multicentric study.

Authors:  Stefano Puleo; Maria Sofia; Maria A Trovato; Antonio Pesce; Teresa R Portale; Domenico Russello; Gaetano La Greca
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2012-10-31       Impact factor: 2.549

10.  Ileocolonic anastomosis after right hemicolectomy for colon cancer: functional end-to-end or end-to-side?

Authors:  Zheng Liu; Guiyu Wang; Ming Yang; Yinggang Chen; Dazhuang Miao; Shan Muhammad; Xishan Wang
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-10-07       Impact factor: 2.754

View more
  5 in total

1.  Surgical outcomes according to the type of monopolar electrocautery device used in laparoscopic surgery for right colon cancer: a comparison of endo-hook versus endo-shears.

Authors:  Jeehye Lee; Jung Rae Cho; Min Hyun Kim; Heung-Kwon Oh; Duck-Woo Kim; Sung-Bum Kang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Comparison of treatment to improve gastrointestinal functions after colorectal surgery within enhanced recovery programmes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jean F Hamel; Charles Sabbagh; Arnaud Alves; Jean M Regimbeau; Timothée Vignaud; Aurélien Venara
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  A comparison of extracorporeal side to side or end to side anastomosis following a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer.

Authors:  Ali Riaz Baqar; Simon Wilkins; Wei Chun Wang; Karen Oliva; Suellyn Centauri; Raymond Yap; Paul McMurrick
Journal:  ANZ J Surg       Date:  2022-04-11       Impact factor: 2.025

Review 4.  Value of different anastomoses in laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer: retrospective study and literature review.

Authors:  Xiaoming Wang; Hongyan Ni; Wangqiang Jia; Sen Wang; Yangyang Zhang; Peng Zhao; Long Yuan
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 3.253

5.  Side-to-side versus end-to-side ileocolic anastomosis in right-sided colectomies: A cohort control study.

Authors:  Snow Yunni Lin; Bryan Jun Liang Buan; Wilson Sim; Sneha Rajiv Jain; Heidi Sian Ying Chang; Kuok Chung Lee; Choon Seng Chong
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2022 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.018

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.