• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

端端吻合与端侧吻合猪大肠渗漏的体外及模拟比较

Ex Vivo and Simulation Comparison of Leakage in End-to-End Versus End-to-Side Anastomosed Porcine Large Intestine.

作者信息

Fahmy Youssef, Trabia Mohamed, Ward Brian, Gallup Lucas, Elks Whitney

机构信息

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Howard R. Hughes College of Engineering, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA.

Department of Surgery, Kirk Kerkorian School of Medicine, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89106, USA.

出版信息

Bioengineering (Basel). 2025 Jun 20;12(7):676. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering12070676.

DOI:10.3390/bioengineering12070676
PMID:40722368
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12293007/
Abstract

Anastomotic leaks after colorectal resection are serious surgical complications. We have compared the integrity of two common colorectal anastomosis techniques, end-to-side (ES) and end-to-end (EE), to control specimens using a novel experimental setup that mimics anastomotic air leak tests, which are typically performed during surgeries. Freshly harvested porcine colonic sections from 23 F1 cross-species pigs were used. Pressure measurements and video imaging were used to monitor the ex vivo experiments on EE, ES, and Control specimens. Using EE ( = 16), ES ( = 12), and Control ( = 22) specimens, leak pressure was 282.6 ± 3.0 mm Hg for EE, 282.8 ± 2.6 mm Hg for ES, and 294.4 ± 12.1 for the Control. Time to leakage was 106.3 ± 28.1 s for EE, 263.9 ± 2127.0 s for ES, and 194.5 ± 90.2 s for the Control. We found that, while EE and ES have nearly identical leak pressures, ES was superior in terms of time to leakage and tissue expansion, which may explain why ES anastomoses have a lower clinical anastomotic leak rate. Two dependent variables representing stress and strain of colonic tissues were introduced. These variables showed ES was comparable to the Control. The experiments were simulated successfully using the finite element method (FEM). This research provides a reproducible ex vivo system with a corresponding FEM system to study the differences between anastomosis techniques and may help design anastomoses with lower leak rates and improve patient outcomes in colorectal surgeries.

摘要

结直肠切除术后的吻合口漏是严重的手术并发症。我们使用一种模拟吻合口漏气测试的新型实验装置,比较了两种常见的结直肠吻合技术(端侧吻合和端端吻合)与对照标本的完整性,这种测试通常在手术中进行。使用了23只F1杂交猪新鲜获取的猪结肠段。压力测量和视频成像用于监测端端吻合、端侧吻合和对照标本的体外实验。使用端端吻合标本(n = 16)、端侧吻合标本(n = 12)和对照标本(n = 22),端端吻合的漏气压为282.6±3.0 mmHg,端侧吻合为282.8±2.6 mmHg,对照为294.4±12.1 mmHg。漏出时间端端吻合为106.3±28.1秒,端侧吻合为263.9±2127.0秒,对照为194.5±90.2秒。我们发现,虽然端端吻合和端侧吻合的漏气压几乎相同,但端侧吻合在漏出时间和组织扩张方面更具优势,这可能解释了为什么端侧吻合的临床吻合口漏率较低。引入了两个代表结肠组织应力和应变的因变量。这些变量显示端侧吻合与对照相当。使用有限元方法(FEM)成功模拟了实验。本研究提供了一个可重复的体外系统及相应的有限元系统,以研究吻合技术之间的差异,并可能有助于设计漏率更低的吻合方式,改善结直肠手术患者的预后。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/ae1cf87d636c/bioengineering-12-00676-g019.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/4d6dd06bb51b/bioengineering-12-00676-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/6a0ab857b2e5/bioengineering-12-00676-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/733ab2a350b3/bioengineering-12-00676-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/f1d3035a2173/bioengineering-12-00676-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/832836eb388a/bioengineering-12-00676-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/a4eaf65881ef/bioengineering-12-00676-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/b469d9fafbf6/bioengineering-12-00676-g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/a492c2e179d5/bioengineering-12-00676-g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/756066951a92/bioengineering-12-00676-g009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/343de90f4587/bioengineering-12-00676-g010.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/6666f8b32171/bioengineering-12-00676-g011.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/fb45d2664999/bioengineering-12-00676-g012.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/8dc3f33206df/bioengineering-12-00676-g013.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/5420f1633c0b/bioengineering-12-00676-g014.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/b7d4f69a1341/bioengineering-12-00676-g015.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/9de98d9feef4/bioengineering-12-00676-g016.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/1ca2b0c2bc15/bioengineering-12-00676-g017.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/0d77218d95ae/bioengineering-12-00676-g018.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/ae1cf87d636c/bioengineering-12-00676-g019.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/4d6dd06bb51b/bioengineering-12-00676-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/6a0ab857b2e5/bioengineering-12-00676-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/733ab2a350b3/bioengineering-12-00676-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/f1d3035a2173/bioengineering-12-00676-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/832836eb388a/bioengineering-12-00676-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/a4eaf65881ef/bioengineering-12-00676-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/b469d9fafbf6/bioengineering-12-00676-g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/a492c2e179d5/bioengineering-12-00676-g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/756066951a92/bioengineering-12-00676-g009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/343de90f4587/bioengineering-12-00676-g010.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/6666f8b32171/bioengineering-12-00676-g011.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/fb45d2664999/bioengineering-12-00676-g012.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/8dc3f33206df/bioengineering-12-00676-g013.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/5420f1633c0b/bioengineering-12-00676-g014.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/b7d4f69a1341/bioengineering-12-00676-g015.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/9de98d9feef4/bioengineering-12-00676-g016.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/1ca2b0c2bc15/bioengineering-12-00676-g017.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/0d77218d95ae/bioengineering-12-00676-g018.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/98c1/12293007/ae1cf87d636c/bioengineering-12-00676-g019.jpg

相似文献

1
Ex Vivo and Simulation Comparison of Leakage in End-to-End Versus End-to-Side Anastomosed Porcine Large Intestine.端端吻合与端侧吻合猪大肠渗漏的体外及模拟比较
Bioengineering (Basel). 2025 Jun 20;12(7):676. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering12070676.
2
Experimental evaluation of clinical colon anastomotic leakage.临床结肠吻合口漏的实验评估
Dan Med J. 2014 Mar;61(3):B4821.
3
Stapled versus handsewn methods for ileocolic anastomoses.回结肠吻合术的吻合器与手工缝合方法
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Sep 7(9):CD004320. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004320.pub3.
4
The impact of stapled compared to handsewn repair on anastomotic outcomes in trauma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.吻合器缝合与手工缝合修复对创伤患者吻合口结局的影响:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
ANZ J Surg. 2024 Apr;94(4):604-613. doi: 10.1111/ans.18925. Epub 2024 Mar 8.
5
Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Imaging for Colorectal Surgery: A Health Technology Assessment.用于结直肠手术的吲哚菁绿荧光成像:一项卫生技术评估
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2025 Jul 10;25(3):1-124. eCollection 2025.
6
The measurement and monitoring of surgical adverse events.手术不良事件的测量与监测
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(22):1-194. doi: 10.3310/hta5220.
7
Stapled versus handsewn methods for ileocolic anastomoses.回结肠吻合术的吻合器与手工缝合方法
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jul 18(3):CD004320. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004320.pub2.
8
International Consensus on Reporting Anastomotic Leaks After Colorectal Cancer Surgery: The CoReAL Reporting Framework.结直肠癌手术后吻合口漏报告的国际共识:CoReAL报告框架
Dis Colon Rectum. 2025 Aug 1;68(8):941-950. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003790. Epub 2025 May 7.
9
First Fully Endoscopic End-to-End Colonic Anastomoses With a Novel Endoscopic Device: A Feasibility Study in a Porcine Model.首例使用新型内镜设备进行的全内镜下结肠端端吻合术:猪模型可行性研究
Dis Colon Rectum. 2024 Dec 1;67(12):1584-1591. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003486. Epub 2024 Sep 10.
10
Preoperative combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation for preventing complications in elective colorectal surgery.择期结直肠手术中术前联合机械和口服抗生素肠道准备预防并发症。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Feb 7;2(2):CD014909. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014909.pub2.

本文引用的文献

1
Double-row staple technology versus triple-row staple technology for colorectal surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.双排钉技术与三排钉技术在结直肠手术中的应用:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Surgery. 2024 Sep;176(3):633-644. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2024.04.039. Epub 2024 Jun 13.
2
Development of an Anisotropic Hyperelastic Material Model for Porcine Colorectal Tissues.猪结肠组织各向异性超弹性材料模型的建立
Bioengineering (Basel). 2024 Jan 8;11(1):64. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering11010064.
3
Risk of anastomotic leakage with two-row versus three-row manual circular staplers in colorectal anastomosis: a U.S. cohort study.
两排与三排手动圆形吻合器在结直肠吻合术中吻合口漏的风险:一项美国队列研究。
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2023 Nov 7;38(1):264. doi: 10.1007/s00384-023-04552-0.
4
Mechanobiological considerations in colorectal stapling: Implications for technology development.结直肠吻合器的机械生物学考量:对技术发展的启示
Surg Open Sci. 2023 Apr 16;13:54-65. doi: 10.1016/j.sopen.2023.04.004. eCollection 2023 Jun.
5
Techniques for Diagnosing Anastomotic Leaks Intraoperatively in Colorectal Surgeries: A Review.结直肠手术中术中诊断吻合口漏的技术:综述
Cureus. 2023 Jan 24;15(1):e34168. doi: 10.7759/cureus.34168. eCollection 2023 Jan.
6
Randomized experimental study of two novel techniques for transanal repair of dehiscent low rectal anastomosis.两种新型经肛门修复低位直肠吻合口裂开术的随机对照实验研究。
Surg Endosc. 2022 Jun;36(6):4050-4056. doi: 10.1007/s00464-021-08726-1. Epub 2021 Sep 8.
7
Ex vivo comparison of hand-sutured versus circular stapled anastomosis in canine large intestine.犬大肠手工缝合与圆形吻合器吻合的体外比较
Vet Surg. 2021 Oct;50(7):1495-1501. doi: 10.1111/vsu.13705. Epub 2021 Aug 6.
8
Economic Analysis of Leak Complications in Anastomoses Performed with Powered versus Manual Circular Staplers in Left-Sided Colorectal Resections: A US-Based Cost Analysis.左侧结直肠切除术中使用电动与手动圆形吻合器进行吻合的渗漏并发症的经济分析:一项基于美国的成本分析
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2021 Jun 17;13:531-540. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S305296. eCollection 2021.
9
End-to-end versus end-to-side anastomosis for low anterior resection: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.全直肠系膜切除术中经肛拖出与经肛外翻式吻合术的比较:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Surgery. 2021 Aug;170(2):397-404. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.12.030. Epub 2021 Feb 1.
10
Review of Colonic Anastomotic Leakage and Prevention Methods.结肠吻合口漏及其预防方法综述
J Clin Med. 2020 Dec 16;9(12):4061. doi: 10.3390/jcm9124061.