{"title":"Anastomotic leak after manual circular stapled left-sided bowel surgery: analysis of technology-, disease-, and patient-related factors.","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/bjsopen/zrae089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anastomotic leak rates after colorectal surgery remain high. In most left-sided colon and rectal resection surgeries, a circular stapler is utilized to create the primary bowel anastomosis. However, it remains unclear whether a relationship between circular stapler technology and anastomotic leak in left-sided colorectal surgery exists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A post-hoc analysis was conducted using a prospectively collected data set of patients from the 2017 European Society of Coloproctology snapshot audit who underwent elective left-sided resection (left hemicolectomy, sigmoid colectomy, or rectal resection) with a manual circular stapled anastomosis. Rates of anastomotic leak and unplanned intensive care unit stay in association with manual circular stapling were assessed. Patient-, disease-, geographical-, and surgeon-related factors as well as stapler brand were explored using multivariable regression models to identify predictors of adverse outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across 3305 procedures, 8.0% of patients had an anastomotic leak and 2.1% had an unplanned intensive care unit stay. Independent predictors of anastomotic leak were male sex, minimal-access surgery converted to open surgery, and anastomosis height C11 (lower third rectum) (all P < 0.050). Independent predictors of unplanned intensive care unit stay were minimal-access surgery converted to open surgery and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade IV (all P < 0.050). Stapler device brand was not a predictor of anastomotic leak or unplanned intensive care unit stay in multivariable regression analysis. There were no differences in rates of anastomotic leak and unplanned intensive care unit stay according to stapler head diameter, geographical region, or surgeon experience.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients undergoing left-sided bowel anastomosis, choice of manual circular stapler, in terms of manufacturer or head diameter, is not associated with rates of anastomotic leak and unplanned intensive care unit stay.</p>","PeriodicalId":9028,"journal":{"name":"BJS Open","volume":"8 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11498054/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJS Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrae089","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Anastomotic leak rates after colorectal surgery remain high. In most left-sided colon and rectal resection surgeries, a circular stapler is utilized to create the primary bowel anastomosis. However, it remains unclear whether a relationship between circular stapler technology and anastomotic leak in left-sided colorectal surgery exists.
Methods: A post-hoc analysis was conducted using a prospectively collected data set of patients from the 2017 European Society of Coloproctology snapshot audit who underwent elective left-sided resection (left hemicolectomy, sigmoid colectomy, or rectal resection) with a manual circular stapled anastomosis. Rates of anastomotic leak and unplanned intensive care unit stay in association with manual circular stapling were assessed. Patient-, disease-, geographical-, and surgeon-related factors as well as stapler brand were explored using multivariable regression models to identify predictors of adverse outcomes.
Results: Across 3305 procedures, 8.0% of patients had an anastomotic leak and 2.1% had an unplanned intensive care unit stay. Independent predictors of anastomotic leak were male sex, minimal-access surgery converted to open surgery, and anastomosis height C11 (lower third rectum) (all P < 0.050). Independent predictors of unplanned intensive care unit stay were minimal-access surgery converted to open surgery and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade IV (all P < 0.050). Stapler device brand was not a predictor of anastomotic leak or unplanned intensive care unit stay in multivariable regression analysis. There were no differences in rates of anastomotic leak and unplanned intensive care unit stay according to stapler head diameter, geographical region, or surgeon experience.
Conclusion: In patients undergoing left-sided bowel anastomosis, choice of manual circular stapler, in terms of manufacturer or head diameter, is not associated with rates of anastomotic leak and unplanned intensive care unit stay.
背景:结肠直肠手术后的吻合口漏率居高不下。在大多数左侧结肠和直肠切除手术中,都会使用环形订书机来进行主肠吻合。然而,左侧结直肠手术中圆形订书机技术与吻合口漏之间是否存在关系仍不清楚:利用 2017 年欧洲结直肠学会快照审计中前瞻性收集的患者数据集进行了一项事后分析,这些患者接受了选择性左侧切除术(左半结肠切除术、乙状结肠切除术或直肠切除术),并进行了手动环形订书机吻合术。评估了与手动环形订书机吻合相关的吻合口漏率和非计划重症监护室住院率。使用多变量回归模型探讨了患者、疾病、地域和外科医生相关因素以及订书机品牌,以确定不良后果的预测因素:在3305例手术中,8.0%的患者出现吻合口漏,2.1%的患者意外入住重症监护室。吻合口漏的独立预测因素为男性、最小入路手术转为开放手术以及吻合口高度C11(直肠下三分之一处)(P均<0.050)。计划外重症监护室住院的独立预测因素是最小入路手术转为开放手术和美国麻醉医师协会 IV 级(所有 P < 0.050)。在多变量回归分析中,订书机设备品牌不是吻合口漏或非计划重症监护病房住院的预测因素。根据订书机头部直径、地理区域或外科医生经验的不同,吻合口漏和非计划重症监护病房住院率也没有差异:结论:在接受左侧肠吻合术的患者中,手动圆形订书机的制造商或订书机头直径与吻合口漏率和非计划重症监护病房住院时间无关。