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

Does advancement in stapling technology with triple-row and enhanced staple configurations confer... 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 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Surgical Endoscopy Springer Journals

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

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/does-advancement-in-stapling-technology-with-triple-row-and-enhanced-KofInkrtwf
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 by Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Surgery; Gynecology; Gastroenterology; Hepatology; Proctology; Abdominal Surgery
ISSN
0930-2794
eISSN
1432-2218
D.O.I.
10.1007/s00464-018-6027-1
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

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

Journal

Surgical EndoscopySpringer Journals

Published: Jan 16, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off