Zhaoming Wang1, Xiaoyu Dai2, Haibin Xie3, Jin Feng3, Zhong Li3, Qicheng Lu4. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China. Electronic address: fengdun@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China. 3. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China. 4. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China. Electronic address: changyiluqicheng@sina.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to evaluate the effects of staple line reinforcement during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. METHODS: Relevant articles published in English (up to July 25, 2015) were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge. The outcomes of staple line hemorrhage and leakage, overall complications, operative time were pooled. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were performed using Stata 13.1 software. RESULTS: Eight randomized controlled trials involving 791 patients (453 cases and 338 controls) were analyzed. Compared to performing no reinforcement, staple line reinforcement was associated with a lower risk of staple line hemorrhage (RR = 0.609, 95%CI = 0.439-0.846, P = 0.003) and overall complications (RR = 0.673, 95%CI = 0.507-0.892, P = 0.006). No significant difference was observed regarding postoperative leakage (RR = 0.654, 95%CI = 0.275-1.555, P = 0.337). Oversewing of the staple line took longer operative time (WMD = 13.211, 95%CI = 6.192-20.229, P = 0.000). CONCLUSION: Staple line reinforcement using buttressing or roofing materials could reduce staple line hemorrhage and overall complications. No obvious advantages of oversewing the staple line were found and it took longer operative time. No significant reduction in leak rate was evidenced after reinforcement.
OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to evaluate the effects of staple line reinforcement during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. METHODS: Relevant articles published in English (up to July 25, 2015) were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge. The outcomes of staple line hemorrhage and leakage, overall complications, operative time were pooled. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were performed using Stata 13.1 software. RESULTS: Eight randomized controlled trials involving 791 patients (453 cases and 338 controls) were analyzed. Compared to performing no reinforcement, staple line reinforcement was associated with a lower risk of staple line hemorrhage (RR = 0.609, 95%CI = 0.439-0.846, P = 0.003) and overall complications (RR = 0.673, 95%CI = 0.507-0.892, P = 0.006). No significant difference was observed regarding postoperative leakage (RR = 0.654, 95%CI = 0.275-1.555, P = 0.337). Oversewing of the staple line took longer operative time (WMD = 13.211, 95%CI = 6.192-20.229, P = 0.000). CONCLUSION: Staple line reinforcement using buttressing or roofing materials could reduce staple line hemorrhage and overall complications. No obvious advantages of oversewing the staple line were found and it took longer operative time. No significant reduction in leak rate was evidenced after reinforcement.
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