Literature DB >> 29340808

Does advancement in stapling technology with triple-row and enhanced staple configurations confer additional safety? A matched comparison of 340 stapled ileocolic anastomoses.

Chi Chung Foo1, Alston Ho On Chiu2, Jeremy Yip2, Wai Lun Law2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Over the past few decades, studies have focused on the safety of stapled anastomosis, especially when compared to that of the handsewn technique. However, studies on the improvement of stapling technology are limited. This study aimed to investigate whether linear triple-row staples (tri-staples) had any advantage over double-row staples.
METHODS: This is a retrospective review of all cases of functional end-to-end anastomoses with linear staplers performed at two centers between 2005 and 2015. Data were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. Cases of anastomoses performed with double-row (DS) and triple-row (TS) staples were matched according to propensity scores. The rates of anastomotic leakage, bleeding, reoperation, and 30-day mortality were compared.
RESULTS: Functional end-to-end ileocolic anastomoses were performed in 563 consecutive patients during the study period. Double- and triple-row stapling devices were used in 389 and 174 anastomoses, respectively. With propensity score matching, 170 cases were chosen from each group. Both groups showed comparable baseline characteristics. The anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, and intra-abdominal collection rates were 2.4 and 0% (p = 0.123), 1.2 and 0% (p = 0.499), and 3.5 and 1.2% (p = 0.283) for DS and TS, respectively. The reoperation and 30-day mortality rates were 5.9 and 1.8% (p = 0.048) and 0.6 and 1.2% (p = 1.000) for DS and TS, respectively. The median lengths of stay were 5 and 6 days (p = 0.072) for DS and TS, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Anastomoses with triple-row staples tended to have a lower morbidity rate, but a significant advantage over double-row staples was not demonstrated in this study.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anastomotic leakage; Ileocolic anastomosis; Stapler

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29340808     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-6027-1

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


  41 in total

1.  Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery: a case-control study.

Authors:  P Jestin; L Påhlman; U Gunnarsson
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2008-03-03       Impact factor: 3.788

2.  Recurrence of Crohn's disease after ileocolic resection is not affected by anastomotic type: results of a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  Robin S McLeod; Bruce G Wolff; Sue Ross; Robert Parkes; Margaret McKenzie
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 4.585

3.  The use of staplers in anatomical side-to-side and functional end-to-end enteroanastomoses.

Authors:  F M Steichen
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1968-11       Impact factor: 3.982

4.  Reoperation as a quality indicator in colorectal surgery: a population-based analysis.

Authors:  Arden M Morris; Laura-Mae Baldwin; Barbara Matthews; Jason A Dominitz; William E Barlow; Sharon A Dobie; Kevin G Billingsley
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 12.969

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

6.  Comparison of 17,641 patients with right- and left-sided colon cancer: differences in epidemiology, perioperative course, histology, and survival.

Authors:  Frank Benedix; Rainer Kube; Frank Meyer; Uwe Schmidt; Ingo Gastinger; Hans Lippert
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.585

7.  Anastomotic leakage is predictive of diminished survival after potentially curative resection for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Kenneth G Walker; Stephen W Bell; Matthew J F X Rickard; Daniel Mehanna; Owen F Dent; Pierre H Chapuis; E Leslie Bokey
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Comparison of different techniques of stapled bowel anastomoses in a canine model.

Authors:  M L Ritchey; K P Lally; R Ostericher
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1993-12

9.  A meta-analysis comparing conventional end-to-end anastomosis vs. other anastomotic configurations after resection in Crohn's disease.

Authors:  Constantinos Simillis; Sanjay Purkayastha; Takayuki Yamamoto; Scott A Strong; Ara W Darzi; Paris P Tekkis
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 4.585

10.  A comparison of stapled and sutured anastomoses in colonic operations.

Authors:  K S Scher; C Scott-Conner; C W Jones; M Leach
Journal:  Surg Gynecol Obstet       Date:  1982-10
View more
  2 in total

1.  Uni-center, patient-blinded, randomized, 12-month, parallel group, noninferiority study to compare outcomes of 3-row vs 2-row circular staplers for colorectal anastomosis formation after low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Nikita A Nekliudov; Petr V Tsarkov; Inna A Tulina
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 1.817

2.  Enhancing the precision of circular stapled colorectal anastomosis: could powered stapler technology provide the solution?

Authors:  R Mirnezami; A Soares; M Chand
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 3.781

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.