Comparing extracorporeal, semi-extracorporeal, and intracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: introducing a bridging technique for colorectal surgeons.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Hye Jung Cho, Jong Woo Kim, Woo Ram Kim
{"title":"Comparing extracorporeal, semi-extracorporeal, and intracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: introducing a bridging technique for colorectal surgeons.","authors":"Hye Jung Cho, Jong Woo Kim, Woo Ram Kim","doi":"10.4174/astr.2024.107.1.42","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy has been associated with faster recovery in bowel function compared to extracorporeal anastomosis (EA). However, the technical difficulty of laparoscopic suturing technique and intraabdominal fecal contamination hinder many surgeons from implementing such a procedure. We introduce and compare a bridging technique designated as \"semi-extracorporeal\" anastomosis (SEA), which embraces the advantages and amends the drawbacks of IA and EA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between May 2016 and October 2022, 100 patients who underwent laparoscopic right hemicolectomy were analyzed. All patients who received laparoscopic right hemicolectomy underwent one of the 3 anastomosis methods (EA, SEA, and IA) by a single colorectal surgeon at a single tertiary care hospital. Data including perioperative parameters and postoperative outcomes were analyzed by each group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 100 patients were reviewed. Thirty patients underwent EA; 50 and 20 patients underwent SEA and IA, respectively. Operation time (minute) was 170 (range, 100-285), 170 (range, 110-280), and 147.5 (range, 80-235) in EA, SEA, and IA, respectively (P = 0.010). Wound size was smaller in SEA and IA compared to EA (P < 0.001). IA was associated with a shorter time (day) to first flatus compared to SEA and EA (4 [range, 2-13] <i>vs.</i> 4 [range, 2-7] <i>vs.</i> 2.5 [range, 1-4], P < 0.001). Postoperative complication showed no statistical significance between the 3 groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Semi-extracorporeal was an attractive bridging option for colorectal surgeons worrisome of the technical difficulty of IA while maintaining faster bowel recovery and smaller wound incisions compared to EA.</p>","PeriodicalId":8071,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11227917/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2024.107.1.42","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy has been associated with faster recovery in bowel function compared to extracorporeal anastomosis (EA). However, the technical difficulty of laparoscopic suturing technique and intraabdominal fecal contamination hinder many surgeons from implementing such a procedure. We introduce and compare a bridging technique designated as "semi-extracorporeal" anastomosis (SEA), which embraces the advantages and amends the drawbacks of IA and EA.

Methods: Between May 2016 and October 2022, 100 patients who underwent laparoscopic right hemicolectomy were analyzed. All patients who received laparoscopic right hemicolectomy underwent one of the 3 anastomosis methods (EA, SEA, and IA) by a single colorectal surgeon at a single tertiary care hospital. Data including perioperative parameters and postoperative outcomes were analyzed by each group.

Results: A total of 100 patients were reviewed. Thirty patients underwent EA; 50 and 20 patients underwent SEA and IA, respectively. Operation time (minute) was 170 (range, 100-285), 170 (range, 110-280), and 147.5 (range, 80-235) in EA, SEA, and IA, respectively (P = 0.010). Wound size was smaller in SEA and IA compared to EA (P < 0.001). IA was associated with a shorter time (day) to first flatus compared to SEA and EA (4 [range, 2-13] vs. 4 [range, 2-7] vs. 2.5 [range, 1-4], P < 0.001). Postoperative complication showed no statistical significance between the 3 groups.

Conclusion: Semi-extracorporeal was an attractive bridging option for colorectal surgeons worrisome of the technical difficulty of IA while maintaining faster bowel recovery and smaller wound incisions compared to EA.

比较腹腔镜右半结肠切除术中的体外、半体外和体内吻合术:为结直肠外科医生引入一种桥接技术。
目的:腹腔镜右半结肠切除术中的体外吻合术(IA)与体外吻合术(EA)相比,肠功能恢复更快。然而,腹腔镜缝合技术的难度和腹腔内粪便污染阻碍了许多外科医生实施这种手术。我们介绍并比较了一种被称为 "半体外 "吻合术(SEA)的桥接技术,该技术集IA和EA的优点于一身,并修正了两者的缺点:方法:对2016年5月至2022年10月期间接受腹腔镜右半结肠切除术的100例患者进行分析。所有接受腹腔镜右半结肠切除术的患者均由一家三级医院的一名结直肠外科医生实施了三种吻合方法(EA、SEA和IA)中的一种。对每组患者的围手术期参数和术后结果等数据进行了分析:结果:共审查了 100 例患者。30名患者接受了EA;50名和20名患者分别接受了SEA和IA。EA、SEA和IA的手术时间(分钟)分别为170(范围,100-285)、170(范围,110-280)和147.5(范围,80-235)(P = 0.010)。与 EA 相比,SEA 和 IA 的伤口面积更小(P < 0.001)。与 SEA 和 EA 相比,IA 的首次排气时间(天)更短(4 [range, 2-13] vs. 4 [range, 2-7] vs. 2.5 [range, 1-4],P < 0.001)。术后并发症在三组之间无统计学意义:结论:与 EA 相比,半体外循环对担心 IA 技术难度的结直肠外科医生来说是一种有吸引力的桥接选择,同时还能保持更快的肠道恢复和更小的伤口切口。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Manuscripts to the Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research (Ann Surg Treat Res) should be written in English according to the instructions for authors. If the details are not described below, the style should follow the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publications available at International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) website (http://www.icmje.org).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信