Wetherall A P, Cooper G J, Ryan J M, Taylor D E, Howell G P, Rice P
Medical Division, Chemical & Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down, Salisbury, Wiltshire.
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1992 May;74(3):200-3; discussion 204.
Laparotomy for penetrating wounds to the abdomen is demanding in terms of time, skill and resources. Any modification of existing techniques that will lessen these demands will be of benefit at surgery in forward areas in war. A previous paper (1) compared a method of small bowel anastomosis using disposable skin staplers with a two-layer handsewn anastomosis using fresh pig ileum. The stapled method was both significantly faster to perform and mechanically superior. In two further studies on a total of 12 pigs the stapled method has been compared with a single-layer and a double-layer handsewn small bowel anastomosis. All 12 pigs recovered from laparotomy without complication. Construction times were recorded. The quality of healing of the anastomoses was assessed by clinical observation, post-mortem and histological examination, and tensiometry. The skill required to perform the stapled anastomoses was estimated subjectively. The stapled technique was consistently faster than the handsewn methods. A Kolmogorov two-sample test showed an improvement in times when comparing the stapled method with the single layer, with a significance of P = 0.05. An improvement was also seen when the stapled method was compared with the double layer, with a significance of P = 0.01. There was no statistically significant difference between the construction times for the two handsewn methods. There was no evidence of anastomotic failure or haematoma at post-mortem and no adverse reaction to the metal staples. No features were identified on histology to indicate impaired healing with the stapled method. Tensiometry of the anastomoses showed that the stapled anastomosis is as mechanically reliable as the handsewn anastomosis. The level of skill required to perform the stapled anastomosisis judged to be within the capabilities of relatively junior surgeons once the technique has been mastered in an anastomosis workshop.
腹部穿透伤的剖腹手术在时间、技能和资源方面要求很高。对现有技术进行任何改进以减少这些要求,都将对战时前沿地区的手术有益。先前的一篇论文(1)比较了使用一次性皮肤吻合器进行小肠吻合的方法与使用新鲜猪回肠进行两层手工缝合吻合的方法。吻合器方法不仅操作速度明显更快,而且机械性能更优越。在另外两项对总共12头猪的研究中,将吻合器方法与单层和双层手工缝合小肠吻合进行了比较。所有12头猪剖腹手术后均康复,无并发症。记录了手术时间。通过临床观察、尸检、组织学检查和张力测定来评估吻合口的愈合质量。主观评估了进行吻合器吻合所需的技能。吻合器技术始终比手工缝合方法更快。Kolmogorov双样本检验显示,将吻合器方法与单层方法比较时,时间有所改善,P值为0.05,具有显著性。将吻合器方法与双层方法比较时也有改善,P值为0.01,具有显著性。两种手工缝合方法的手术时间在统计学上没有显著差异。尸检时没有吻合口失败或血肿的证据,对金属吻合钉也没有不良反应。组织学检查未发现表明吻合器方法愈合受损的特征。吻合口的张力测定表明,吻合器吻合在机械可靠性上与手工缝合吻合一样。一旦在吻合车间掌握了该技术,进行吻合器吻合所需的技能水平被认为在相对初级外科医生的能力范围内。