Suppr超能文献

胸腔镜食管切除术:手工吻合与侧侧直线吻合与圆形吻合比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Transthoracic Esophagectomy: Hand-sewn Versus Side-to-side Linear-stapled Versus Circular-stapled Anastomosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Hospital Alemán of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Department of Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL.

出版信息

Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2022 Jun 1;32(3):380-392. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000001050.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Three anastomotic techniques are mostly used to create an esophagogastric anastomosis in a transthoracic esophagectomy: hand-sewn (HS), side-to-side linear-stapled (SSLS), and circular-stapled (CS). The aim of this study was to compare surgical outcomes after HS, SSLS, and CS intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review using the MEDLINE database was performed to identify original articles analyzing outcomes after HS, SSLS, and CS esophagogastric anastomosis. The main outcome was an anastomotic leakage rate. Secondary outcomes included overall morbidity, major morbidity, and mortality. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each anastomotic technique on the different outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 101 studies comprising 12,595 patients were included; 8835 (70.1%) with CS, 2532 (20.1%) with HS, and 1228 (9.8%) with SSLS anastomosis. Anastomotic leak occurred in 10% [95% confidence interval (CI), 6%-15%], 9% (95% CI, 6%-13%), and 6% (95% CI, 5%-7%) of patients after HS, SSLS, and CS anastomosis, respectively. Risk of anastomotic leakage was significantly higher with HS anastomosis (odds ratio=1.73, 95% CI: 1.47-2.03, P<0.0001) and SSLS (odds ratio=1.68, 95% CI: 1.36-2.08, P<0.0001), as compared with CS. Overall morbidity (HS: 52% vs. SLSS: 39% vs. CS: 35%) and major morbidity (HS: 33% vs. CS: 19%) rates were significantly lower with CS anastomosis. Mortality rate was 4% (95% CI, 3%-6%), 2% (95% CI, 2%-3%), and 3% (95% CI, 3%-4%) after HS, SSLS, and CS anastomosis, respectively.

CONCLUSION

HS and SSLS intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomoses are associated with significantly higher rates of an anastomotic leak than CS anastomosis.

摘要

背景

在经胸食管切除术时,有三种吻合技术常用于创建食管胃吻合术:手工缝合(HS)、侧侧直线吻合(SSLS)和圆形吻合(CS)。本研究旨在比较 HS、SSLS 和 CS 胸内食管胃吻合术的手术结果。

材料和方法

使用 MEDLINE 数据库进行系统评价,以确定分析 HS、SSLS 和 CS 食管胃吻合术结果的原始文章。主要结果是吻合口漏率。次要结果包括总发病率、主要发病率和死亡率。使用比例的荟萃分析和线性回归模型来评估每种吻合技术对不同结果的影响。

结果

共纳入 101 项研究,包含 12595 例患者;8835 例(70.1%)采用 CS 吻合,2532 例(20.1%)采用 HS 吻合,1228 例(9.8%)采用 SSLS 吻合。HS、SSLS 和 CS 吻合术后吻合口漏的发生率分别为 10%(95%CI,6%-15%)、9%(95%CI,6%-13%)和 6%(95%CI,5%-7%)。HS 吻合(比值比=1.73,95%CI:1.47-2.03,P<0.0001)和 SSLS 吻合(比值比=1.68,95%CI:1.36-2.08,P<0.0001)发生吻合口漏的风险明显高于 CS 吻合。CS 吻合的总发病率(HS:52% vs. SSLS:39% vs. CS:35%)和主要发病率(HS:33% vs. CS:19%)均显著降低。HS、SSLS 和 CS 吻合术后的死亡率分别为 4%(95%CI,3%-6%)、2%(95%CI,2%-3%)和 3%(95%CI,3%-4%)。

结论

HS 和 SSLS 胸内食管胃吻合术与 CS 吻合术相比,吻合口漏的发生率明显更高。

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