Suppr超能文献

五种缝钉线加固方案在腹腔镜袖状胃切除术中漏率的比较:系统评价。

Comparison of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy leak rates in five staple-line reinforcement options: a systematic review.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Hopital du Sacré Coeur, 315 Place D'Youville, Suite 191, Montréal, QC, H2Y 0A4, Canada.

Herbert Wertheim School of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2020 Jan;34(1):396-407. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06782-2. Epub 2019 Apr 16.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Staple-line leaks following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) remain a concerning complication. Staple-line buttressing is largely adopted as an acceptable reinforcement but data regarding leaks have been equivocal. This study compared staple-line leaks in five reinforcement options during LSG: no reinforcement (NO-SLR), oversewing (suture), nonabsorbable bovine pericardial strips (BPS), tissue sealant or fibrin glue (Seal), or absorbable polymer membrane (APM).

METHODS

This systematic review study of articles published between 2012 and 2016 regarding LSG leak rates aligned with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Variables of interest included leak rates, bleeding, and complications in addition to surgical and population parameters. An independent Fisher's exact test was used to compare the number of patients with and without leaks for the different reinforcement options.

RESULTS

Of the 1633 articles identified, 148 met inclusion criteria and represented 40,653 patients. Differences in age (older in APM; p = 0.001), starting body mass index (lower in Suture; p = 0.008), and distance from pylorus (closer in BPS; p = 0.04) were observed between groups, but mean bougie size was equivalent. The overall leak rate of 1.5% (607 leaks) ranged from 0.7% for APM (significantly lower than all groups; p ≤ 0.007 for next lowest leak rate) to 2.7% (BPS).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review of staple-line leaks following LSG demonstrated a significantly lower rate using APM staple-line reinforcement as compared to oversewing, use of sealants, BPS reinforcement, or no reinforcement. Variation in surgical technique may also contribute to leak rates.

摘要

背景

腹腔镜袖状胃切除术(LSG)后吻合口漏仍然是一个令人担忧的并发症。吻合口加固主要采用可接受的加固方法,但关于漏的资料尚无定论。本研究比较了 LSG 中五种加固方法的吻合口漏:无加固(NO-SLR)、缝合(suture)、不可吸收牛心包条(BPS)、组织密封剂或纤维蛋白胶(Seal)、或可吸收聚合物膜(APM)。

方法

本系统评价研究于 2012 年至 2016 年发表的有关 LSG 漏率的文章,符合系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目指南。感兴趣的变量包括漏率、出血和并发症以及手术和人群参数。使用独立的 Fisher 精确检验比较不同加固方法中有无漏的患者数量。

结果

在确定的 1633 篇文章中,有 148 篇符合纳入标准,代表 40653 例患者。不同组之间观察到年龄(APM 组年龄较大;p=0.001)、起始体重指数(Suture 组较低;p=0.008)和幽门距离(BPS 组较近;p=0.04)的差异,但球囊大小平均值相当。总的漏率为 1.5%(607 例漏),范围从 APM 的 0.7%(显著低于所有组;与下一个最低漏率相比,p≤0.007)到 2.7%(BPS)。

结论

本 LSG 吻合口漏的系统评价显示,与缝合、密封剂、BPS 加固或无加固相比,APM 吻合口加固的漏率明显较低。手术技术的差异也可能导致漏率的不同。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6784/6946737/e53aa52311c0/464_2019_6782_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验