Lysa Marie1, Catherine Masson2, Bénédicte Gaborit3, Stéphane V Berdah1,2, Thierry Bège4,5. 1. Department of Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Nord, Aix-Marseille University, chemin des Bourrely, 13915 cedex 20, Marseille, France. 2. Laboratory of Applied Biomechanics UMRT24, Aix-Marseille University / IFSTTAR, Marseille, France. 3. Department of Endocrinology, Metabolic Diseases and Nutrition, Hôpital Nord, Aix-Marseille University, chemin des Bourrely, 13915 cedex 20, Marseille, France. 4. Department of Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Nord, Aix-Marseille University, chemin des Bourrely, 13915 cedex 20, Marseille, France. thierry.bege@ap-hm.fr. 5. Laboratory of Applied Biomechanics UMRT24, Aix-Marseille University / IFSTTAR, Marseille, France. thierry.bege@ap-hm.fr.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A gastric leak (GL) represents the main post-operative complication following a sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and occurs most commonly at the top of the stapling, without any clear explanation. OBJECTIVE: This experimental study evaluates the biomechanical behavior of post-SG gastric specimens using both insufflation and tensile tests. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total gastrectomy followed by an ex vivo SG was performed in 15 pigs. The "sleeved" stomachs were subjected to intraluminal hyperpressure until failure. Uniaxial circumferential and longitudinal tensile tests were performed using gastric strips obtained from the "resected" stomachs. All the deformations and burst pressures were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: A GL appeared in the upper third of the stapling in 73% of cases. The mean burst pressure was 26.3 ± 5.3 mmHg and was significantly correlated with the volume of the "sleeved" stomachs (p = 0.02). The overall deformation of the "sleeved" stomachs was comparable in the frontal (38.3%) and profile (40.5%) planes. The greatest displacement was observed at the failure zone (11 mm on average). The biomechanical behavior of the stomach wall differed according to the strip orientation. The circumferential strips presented a higher strain-to-failure rate (97%) and a lower Young's modulus (0.99 MPa) when compared to the longitudinal strips (45% and 2.58 MPa, respectively). CONCLUSION: This preliminary study reproduced a GL in the same location as observed during clinical practice. The volume of the SG influenced the burst pressure. Further experimental studies and numerical simulations should evaluate the impact of shape modifications on an SG.
INTRODUCTION: A gastric leak (GL) represents the main post-operative complication following a sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and occurs most commonly at the top of the stapling, without any clear explanation. OBJECTIVE: This experimental study evaluates the biomechanical behavior of post-SG gastric specimens using both insufflation and tensile tests. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total gastrectomy followed by an ex vivo SG was performed in 15 pigs. The "sleeved" stomachs were subjected to intraluminal hyperpressure until failure. Uniaxial circumferential and longitudinal tensile tests were performed using gastric strips obtained from the "resected" stomachs. All the deformations and burst pressures were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: A GL appeared in the upper third of the stapling in 73% of cases. The mean burst pressure was 26.3 ± 5.3 mmHg and was significantly correlated with the volume of the "sleeved" stomachs (p = 0.02). The overall deformation of the "sleeved" stomachs was comparable in the frontal (38.3%) and profile (40.5%) planes. The greatest displacement was observed at the failure zone (11 mm on average). The biomechanical behavior of the stomach wall differed according to the strip orientation. The circumferential strips presented a higher strain-to-failure rate (97%) and a lower Young's modulus (0.99 MPa) when compared to the longitudinal strips (45% and 2.58 MPa, respectively). CONCLUSION: This preliminary study reproduced a GL in the same location as observed during clinical practice. The volume of the SG influenced the burst pressure. Further experimental studies and numerical simulations should evaluate the impact of shape modifications on an SG.
Authors: Raul J Rosenthal; Alberto Aceves Diaz; Dag Arvidsson; Randal S Baker; Nicola Basso; Drake Bellanger; Camilo Boza; Haicam El Mourad; Michael France; Michel Gagner; Manoel Galvao-Neto; Kelvin D Higa; Jacques Himpens; Colleen M Hutchinson; Moises Jacobs; John O Jorgensen; Gregg Jossart; Muffazal Lakdawala; Ninh T Nguyen; David Nocca; Gerhard Prager; Alfons Pomp; Almino Cardoso Ramos; Raul J Rosenthal; Shashank Shah; Michel Vix; Alan Wittgrove; Natan Zundel Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2011-11-10 Impact factor: 4.734
Authors: Ronit T Yehoshua; Leonid A Eidelman; Michael Stein; Suzana Fichman; Amir Mazor; Jacopo Chen; Hanna Bernstine; Pierre Singer; Ram Dickman; Nahum Beglaibter; Scott A Shikora; Raul J Rosenthal; Moshe Rubin Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2008-06-06 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Manish Parikh; Reda Issa; Aileen McCrillis; John K Saunders; Aku Ude-Welcome; Michel Gagner Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Arthur Bohdjalian; Felix B Langer; Soheila Shakeri-Leidenmühler; Lisa Gfrerer; Bernhard Ludvik; Johannes Zacherl; Gerhard Prager Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2010-01-22 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Ana Maria Burgos; Italo Braghetto; Attila Csendes; Fernando Maluenda; Owen Korn; Julio Yarmuch; Luis Gutierrez Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Lars Sjöström; Kristina Narbro; C David Sjöström; Kristjan Karason; Bo Larsson; Hans Wedel; Ted Lystig; Marianne Sullivan; Claude Bouchard; Björn Carlsson; Calle Bengtsson; Sven Dahlgren; Anders Gummesson; Peter Jacobson; Jan Karlsson; Anna-Karin Lindroos; Hans Lönroth; Ingmar Näslund; Torsten Olbers; Kaj Stenlöf; Jarl Torgerson; Göran Agren; Lena M S Carlsson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-08-23 Impact factor: 91.245