| Literature DB >> 29643968 |
Krzysztof Barski1, Artur Binda1, Emilia Kudlicka1, Paweł Jaworski1, Wiesław Tarnowski1.
Abstract
Despite the growing experience of bariatric surgeons in performing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, the number of complications involving staple line leaks remains constant. Hence a solution to avoid such complications is still sought. A defect of the staple line may be the consequence of an inappropriate choice of staple size in relation to gastric wall thickness. Due to the variable nature of gastric wall thickness, the choice of proper staple height is not obvious. In the few studies in which gastric wall thickness was measured, it was observed to decrease gradually from the antrum to the fundus. However, the authors are divided on the issue of whether gender and body mass index influence gastric wall thickness. The question whether there are other perioperative factors that would allow gastric wall thickness to be predicted remains unanswered.Entities:
Keywords: gastric wall thickness; laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy; staple height; staple line leak
Year: 2018 PMID: 29643968 PMCID: PMC5890851 DOI: 10.5114/wiitm.2018.73362
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne ISSN: 1895-4588 Impact factor: 1.195
Open staple height and range of tissue thickness for cartridges produced by Covidien
| Endo GIA Tri-Staple Technology (Covidien) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cartridge | Black | Purple | Tan | Gray |
| Open staple height [mm] | 4 – 4.5 – 5 | 3 – 3.5 – 4 | 2 – 2.5 – 3 | 2 – 2 –2 |
| Range of tissue thickness [mm] | 2.25–3.0 | 1.5–2.25 | 0.88–1.8 | 0.75–0.88 |
Open staple height and range of tissue thickness for cartridges produced by Ethicon
| Echelon Flex (Ethicon) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cartridge | Black | Green | Gold | Blue | White |
| Open staple height [mm] | 4.2 | 4.1 | 3.8 | 3.6 | 2.6 |
| Range of tissue thickness [mm] | 2.3–4.0 | 2.0–3.25 | 1.8–3.0 | 1.5–1.75 | 1.0–2.0 |
Gastric wall thickness measurements taken at three anatomical regions of the stomach summarized from four publications
| Parameter | Author (year of publication) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elariny (2005) | Rawlins (2014) | Van Rutte (2015) | Huang (2015) | ||
| Female | Fundus [mm] | 1.61 | 1.94 | 1.37 | 1.72 |
| Corpus [mm] | 2.34 | 2.32 | 1.98 | 2.64 | |
| Antrum [mm] | 3.09 | 2.64 | 2.55 | 3.09 | |
| Male | Fundus [mm] | 1.81 | 2.09 | 1.37 | 1.67 |
| Corpus [mm] | 2.6 | 2.38 | 1.98 | 2.57 | |
| Antrum [mm] | 3.17 | 2.96 | 2.55 | 3.12 | |
Influence of location, gender and BMI on gastric wall thickness
| Parameter | Author | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elariny (2005) | Rawlins (2014) | Van Rutte (2015) | Huang (2015) | ||
| Influence on gastric wall thickness | Location | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Gender | Yes | Yes | Not analyzed | Depends on localization | |
| BMI | No | Yes (over 50 kg/m2) | No | Not analyzed | |