Literature DB >> 9488514

Omentoplasty in the prevention of anastomotic leakage after colonic or rectal resection: a prospective randomized study in 712 patients. French Associations for Surgical Research.

F Merad1, J M Hay, A Fingerhut, Y Flamant, J M Molkhou, Y Laborde.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of omentoplasty (OP) in the prevention of anastomotic leakage after colonic or rectal resection. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: It has been proposed that OP--wrapping the omentum around the colonic or rectal anastomosis--reinforces intestinal sutures with the expectation of lowering the rate of anastomotic leakage. However, there are no prospective, randomized trials to date to prove this.
METHODS: Between September 1989 and March 1994, a total of 705 patients (347 males and 358 females) with a mean age of 66 +/- 15 years (range, 15-101) originating from 20 centers were randomized to undergo either OP (n = 341) or not (NO, n = 364) to reinforce the colonic anastomosis after colectomy. Patients had carcinoma, benign tumor, colonic Crohn's disease, diverticular disease of the sigmoid colon, or another affliction located anywhere from the right colon to and including the midrectum. Patients undergoing emergency surgery were not included. Random allotment took place once the resection and anastomosis had been performed, the surgeon had tested the anastomosis for airtightness, and the omental flap was deemed feasible. Patients were divided into four strata: ileo- or colocolonic anastomosis, supraperitoneal ileo- or colorectal anastomosis, infraperitoneal ileo- or colorectal anastomosis, and ileo- or coloanal anastomosis. The primary end point was anastomotic leakage. Secondary end points included intra- and extraabdominal related morbidity and mortality. Severity of anastomotic leakage was based on the rate of repeat operations and related deaths.
RESULTS: Both groups were comparable in terms of preoperative characteristics. Intraoperative findings were similar, except that there were significantly more septic operations and abdominal drainage performed in the NO group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). Thirty-five patients (4.9%) had postoperative anastomotic leakage, 16 in the OP group (4.7%) and 19 in the NO group (5.2%). There were 32 deaths (4.5%), 17 (4.9%) in the OP group and 15 (4.2%) in the NO group. Five patients with anastomotic leakage died (0.8%), 2 of whom had OP. There were 37 repeat operations (30%), 12 (6 in each group) for anastomotic leakage. Repeat operation was associated with fatal outcome in 14% of cases. The rate of these and the other intra- and extraabdominal complications did not differ significantly between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: OP to reinforce colorectal anastomosis decreases neither the rate nor the severity of anastomotic failure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9488514      PMCID: PMC1191233          DOI: 10.1097/00000658-199802000-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  43 in total

1.  Results of 1,000 single-layer continuous polypropylene intestinal anastomoses.

Authors:  E Max; W B Sweeney; H R Bailey; S C Oommen; D R Butts; K W Smith; L F Zamora; G B Skakun
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 2.565

2.  A retrospective study of colostomies, leaks and strictures after colorectal anastomosis.

Authors:  J R Tuson; W G Everett
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Factor contributing to leakage of colonic anastomoses.

Authors:  T R Schrock; C W Deveney; J E Dunphy
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1973-05       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Anastomotic leakage after low colonic anastomosis. Clinical and experimental aspects.

Authors:  L Morgenstern; T Yamakawa; M Ben-Shoshan; H Lippman
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1972-01       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  Use of omental pedicle graft to protect low anterior colonic anastomosis.

Authors:  B Lanter; R A Mason
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1979-10       Impact factor: 4.585

6.  Trials on trial. A review of trials of antibiotic prophylaxis.

Authors:  M Evans; A V Pollock
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1984-01

7.  The water soluble contrast enema after rectal anastomosis.

Authors:  A J Shorthouse; C I Bartram; A A Eyers; J P Thomson
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1982-12       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Intraoperative air testing of colorectal anastomoses: a prospective, randomized trial.

Authors:  J D Beard; M L Nicholson; R D Sayers; D Lloyd; N W Everson
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 6.939

9.  Abdominoperineal and anterior resection of the rectum with retrocolic omentoplasty and no drainage.

Authors:  S R Smith; I Swift; H Gompertz; W N Baker
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 6.939

10.  Importance of the omentum in the development of intra-abdominal metastases.

Authors:  R J Lawrance; M Loizidou; A J Cooper; P Alexander; I Taylor
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 6.939

View more
  37 in total

1.  The omentum.

Authors:  Cameron Platell; Deborah Cooper; John M Papadimitriou; John C Hall
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Risk factors for mortality and morbidity after elective sigmoid resection for diverticulitis: prospective multicenter multivariate analysis of 582 patients.

Authors:  Patrick Pessaux; Fabrice Muscari; Jean-François Ouellet; Simon Msika; Jean-Marie Hay; Bertrand Millat; Abe Fingerhut; Yves Flamant
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2003-11-26       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Anastomotic sealing by extracellular matrices (ECM) improves healing of colonic anastomoses in the critical early phase.

Authors:  Jens Hoeppner; Bettina Wassmuth; Goran Marjanovic; Sylvia Timme; Ulrich Theodor Hopt; Tobias Keck
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2010-03-31       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  Anastomotic disruption after large bowel resection.

Authors:  Mohammad U Nasirkhan; Farshad Abir; Walter Longo; Robert Kozol
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-04-28       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Utility of divided omentum for preventing complications associated with laparoscopic gastric bypass.

Authors:  Nobumi Tagaya; Kazunori Kasama; Eiji Kanahira; Keiichi Kubota
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2007-11-30       Impact factor: 4.129

6.  The blind colonic J-pouch: an original technique to reduce the surgical risk in the treatment of extra-peritoneal rectal cancer.

Authors:  Gabriele Valenti; Costantino Campisi; Alessandro Testa; Alessandro Arturi; Giovanni Torino
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-06-06       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 7.  The omentum: anatomical, metabolic, and surgical aspects.

Authors:  Danielle Collins; Aisling M Hogan; Donal O'Shea; Des C Winter
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Little consensus in either definition or diagnosis of a lower gastro-intestinal anastomotic leak amongst colorectal surgeons.

Authors:  K Adams; S Papagrigoriadis
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Reoperation for anastomotic failure.

Authors:  Zuri A Murrell; Michael J Stamos
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2006-11

10.  Small intestinal submucosa for reinforcement of colonic anastomosis.

Authors:  Jens Hoeppner; Vladan Crnogorac; Goran Marjanovic; Eva Jüttner; Tobias Keck; Hans-Fred Weiser; Ullrich Theodor Hopt
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2009-01-30       Impact factor: 2.571

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.