Is Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Without Staple Reinforcement Safer? Analysis of 426 Consecutive Cases.

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Nail Omarov, Elnur Huseynov, Gulcan Coban, Mushviq Hasanov
{"title":"Is Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Without Staple Reinforcement Safer? Analysis of 426 Consecutive Cases.","authors":"Nail Omarov, Elnur Huseynov, Gulcan Coban, Mushviq Hasanov","doi":"10.62713/aic.3774","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG) is an accepted safe procedure and the most common surgical method used in the treatment of morbid obesity. Leakage and staple line bleeding are significant postoperative complications that can cause concern due to the long staple line. The purpose of this study to examine the risk of complications that may arise due to the lack of staple line reinforcement during the surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between March 2021 and May 2023, 426 consecutive patients who underwent LSG in Avrupa Safak Hospital were identified through a retrospective database. The patients included in the study were divided into two groups according to the staple line reinforcement. Group A (n = 210) received staple line reinforcement (SLR) and Group B (n = 204) received non-staple line reinforcement (NSLR). Twelve patients who did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded from the study. Patient demographics, operative time, postoperative and perioperative complications such as staple line leak, bleeding, conversion to open surgery, length of hospital stay, abdominal pain, morbidity and mortality-related data were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age, body mass index (BMI), and ASA scores were similar in both groups. Operative time was longer in SLR group (p < 0.001). Postoperative complications occurred in 6 (2.9%) and 9 (4.4%) patients in Groups A and B respectively (p = 0.397). There was no staple line leak in either group. There were two strictures in Group A. Mean length of postoperative hospital stay was 2.17 and 2.16 days in Groups A and B respectively (p = 0.830). There was no in patient death.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Reinforcing the staple line after LSG is not necessary to reduce the risk of staple line leaks and bleeding.</p>","PeriodicalId":8210,"journal":{"name":"Annali italiani di chirurgia","volume":"96 4","pages":"562-567"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annali italiani di chirurgia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.62713/aic.3774","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG) is an accepted safe procedure and the most common surgical method used in the treatment of morbid obesity. Leakage and staple line bleeding are significant postoperative complications that can cause concern due to the long staple line. The purpose of this study to examine the risk of complications that may arise due to the lack of staple line reinforcement during the surgery.

Methods: Between March 2021 and May 2023, 426 consecutive patients who underwent LSG in Avrupa Safak Hospital were identified through a retrospective database. The patients included in the study were divided into two groups according to the staple line reinforcement. Group A (n = 210) received staple line reinforcement (SLR) and Group B (n = 204) received non-staple line reinforcement (NSLR). Twelve patients who did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded from the study. Patient demographics, operative time, postoperative and perioperative complications such as staple line leak, bleeding, conversion to open surgery, length of hospital stay, abdominal pain, morbidity and mortality-related data were analyzed.

Results: The mean age, body mass index (BMI), and ASA scores were similar in both groups. Operative time was longer in SLR group (p < 0.001). Postoperative complications occurred in 6 (2.9%) and 9 (4.4%) patients in Groups A and B respectively (p = 0.397). There was no staple line leak in either group. There were two strictures in Group A. Mean length of postoperative hospital stay was 2.17 and 2.16 days in Groups A and B respectively (p = 0.830). There was no in patient death.

Conclusions: Reinforcing the staple line after LSG is not necessary to reduce the risk of staple line leaks and bleeding.

无钉钉加固的腹腔镜袖式胃切除术更安全吗?426例连续病例分析。
目的:腹腔镜袖胃切除术(LSG)是一种公认的安全手术,也是治疗病态肥胖最常用的手术方法。由于钉线较长,渗漏和钉线出血是术后重要的并发症,可引起关注。本研究的目的是探讨手术中由于缺乏钉线加固而可能出现的并发症的风险。方法:在2021年3月至2023年5月期间,通过回顾性数据库确定了在Avrupa Safak医院连续接受LSG的426例患者。根据钉线加固情况将纳入研究的患者分为两组。A组(n = 210)采用短钉线加固(SLR), B组(n = 204)采用非短钉线加固(NSLR)。不符合纳入标准的12例患者被排除在研究之外。分析患者人口统计学、手术时间、术后和围手术期并发症,如钉线泄漏、出血、转开手术、住院时间、腹痛、发病率和死亡率等相关数据。结果:两组患者的平均年龄、体重指数(BMI)和ASA评分相似。SLR组手术时间更长(p < 0.001)。A组术后并发症发生率6例(2.9%),B组术后并发症发生率9例(4.4%)(p = 0.397)。两组均无钉线泄漏。A组狭窄2条,A组术后平均住院时间2.17天,B组术后平均住院时间2.16天(p = 0.830)。没有病人死亡。结论:在LSG术后加强钉线对于减少钉线泄漏和出血的风险是没有必要的。
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
0.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
116
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Annali Italiani di Chirurgia is a bimonthly journal and covers all aspects of surgery:elective, emergency and experimental surgery, as well as problems involving technology, teaching, organization and forensic medicine. The articles are published in Italian or English, though English is preferred because it facilitates the international diffusion of the journal (v.Guidelines for Authors and Norme per gli Autori). The articles published are divided into three main sections:editorials, original articles, and case reports and innovations.
×
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