Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Division of General Surgery, St Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Surg Endosc. 2024 Oct;38(10):5541-5546. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-11082-5. Epub 2024 Jul 25.
The objective of this study was to compare the anastomotic leak rates between powered and manual circular staplers in elective left-sided colorectal resections.
A retrospective cohort study of elective left-sided colorectal resections before and after implementation of a powered circular stapler at a tertiary care center was conducted. The manual stapler group consisted of consecutive resections performed between January 2016 to December 2016 and the powered stapler group, between September 2021 and December 2022. Primary outcome was 30-day anastomotic leak rate. A chi-squared analysis was performed to compare anastomotic leak rates. Factors associated with anastomotic leak were examined.
Two-hundred forty-seven patients were included: 154 in the manual stapler group and 93 in the powered stapler group. Mean (SD) age was 60 (15) years old, 37.7% were female and 72.9% of resections were performed for malignancy. Both groups had similar patient characteristics and surgical technique. Overall leak rate was 2.0% in the manual stapler group and 10.8% in the powered stapler group. The powered staplers were found to have 6.06 times the odds of leak compared to manual staplers (95% CI, 1.62-22.65; p = 0.01). None of the other factors were found to be associated with anastomotic leak.
Patients who had left-sided colorectal anastomosis had higher anastomotic leak rates with powered compared to manual circular staplers. This finding is contrary to previous retrospective studies that found lower leak rates with powered staplers.
本研究旨在比较电动和手动圆形吻合器在择期左半结直肠切除术中的吻合口漏发生率。
对一家三级保健中心实施电动圆形吻合器前后的择期左半结直肠切除术进行回顾性队列研究。手动吻合器组包括 2016 年 1 月至 2016 年 12 月连续进行的切除术,而电动吻合器组包括 2021 年 9 月至 2022 年 12 月进行的切除术。主要结局为 30 天吻合口漏发生率。采用卡方分析比较吻合口漏发生率。检查与吻合口漏相关的因素。
共纳入 247 例患者:手动吻合器组 154 例,电动吻合器组 93 例。平均(SD)年龄为 60(15)岁,女性占 37.7%,72.9%的手术为恶性肿瘤。两组患者的一般特征和手术技术相似。手动吻合器组的总体漏诊率为 2.0%,电动吻合器组为 10.8%。与手动吻合器相比,电动吻合器发生漏诊的几率高 6.06 倍(95%CI,1.62-22.65;p=0.01)。没有其他因素与吻合口漏相关。
与手动圆形吻合器相比,接受左半结直肠吻合术的患者使用电动吻合器时吻合口漏发生率更高。这一发现与之前发现电动吻合器漏诊率较低的回顾性研究结果相反。