{"title":"传统手工吻合器与圆形动力吻合器在左侧结直肠吻合术中的临床效果比较研究","authors":"H. Singhavi","doi":"10.59657/2993-0197.brs.23.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The aim of our study was to assess safety and efficacy of powered circular staplers for colorectal anastomosis and its comparison with conventional (manual staplers). Method: It’s a single institute, single surgeon based retrospective study to compare powered staplers with manual for the patient’s undergoing anastomosis in colorectal surgery. We assessed the two techniques on the basis of type of surgery, technical problems, intraoperative leak, post-operative leak, blood transfusion, post-operative complication rates, adverse events, additional use of analgesics, antibiotics and readmission rates. SPSS version 20 was used to perform the statistical analysis. Result: Study consisted of forty- eight patients who underwent surgery for colorectal disease. Mean operating time was same for both the groups (3.33 hours). One post-operative leak was observed in manual stapler anastomosis. Four patients had complications including anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, wound infection and perianal pain in our study, amongst them three patients underwent manual anastomosis while one patient underwent powered anastomosis. One patient in each arm required readmission. Three patients who underwent powered stapler anastomosis required higher analgesics and higher antibiotics as compared to none in manual, however it was not statistically significant. The mean pain score for patient in powered stapler and manual stapler was 2.96 and 2.92 respectively(p<0.851), while mean length of stay was 7.04 for powered and 6.1 for manual stapler(p<0.08). Conclusion: In our preliminary study, powered stapler was safe and efficacious without any added complications and adverse events. We observed comparable intraoperative and higher trends of post-operative complication rates in manual stapler group.","PeriodicalId":210002,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical and Molecular Oncology","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Study of The Clinical Outcomes Using Conventional Manual Staplers and Circular Powered Staplers in Patients Undergoing Left Sided Colorectal Anastomosis\",\"authors\":\"H. Singhavi\",\"doi\":\"10.59657/2993-0197.brs.23.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: The aim of our study was to assess safety and efficacy of powered circular staplers for colorectal anastomosis and its comparison with conventional (manual staplers). Method: It’s a single institute, single surgeon based retrospective study to compare powered staplers with manual for the patient’s undergoing anastomosis in colorectal surgery. We assessed the two techniques on the basis of type of surgery, technical problems, intraoperative leak, post-operative leak, blood transfusion, post-operative complication rates, adverse events, additional use of analgesics, antibiotics and readmission rates. SPSS version 20 was used to perform the statistical analysis. Result: Study consisted of forty- eight patients who underwent surgery for colorectal disease. Mean operating time was same for both the groups (3.33 hours). One post-operative leak was observed in manual stapler anastomosis. Four patients had complications including anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, wound infection and perianal pain in our study, amongst them three patients underwent manual anastomosis while one patient underwent powered anastomosis. One patient in each arm required readmission. Three patients who underwent powered stapler anastomosis required higher analgesics and higher antibiotics as compared to none in manual, however it was not statistically significant. The mean pain score for patient in powered stapler and manual stapler was 2.96 and 2.92 respectively(p<0.851), while mean length of stay was 7.04 for powered and 6.1 for manual stapler(p<0.08). Conclusion: In our preliminary study, powered stapler was safe and efficacious without any added complications and adverse events. We observed comparable intraoperative and higher trends of post-operative complication rates in manual stapler group.\",\"PeriodicalId\":210002,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Clinical and Molecular Oncology\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Clinical and Molecular Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.59657/2993-0197.brs.23.002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical and Molecular Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59657/2993-0197.brs.23.002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:评价动力圆形吻合器用于结直肠吻合术的安全性和有效性,并与传统(手动)吻合器进行比较。方法:采用单机构、单术者的回顾性研究,比较电动吻合器与手动吻合器在结直肠外科吻合术中的应用。我们根据手术类型、技术问题、术中泄漏、术后泄漏、输血、术后并发症发生率、不良事件、额外使用止痛药、抗生素和再入院率对这两种技术进行了评估。采用SPSS version 20进行统计分析。结果:研究对象为48例结直肠疾病手术患者。两组平均手术时间相同,均为3.33 h。术后手工吻合器吻合术中出现1例术后渗漏。本组4例患者出现吻合口漏、吻合口狭窄、伤口感染、肛周疼痛等并发症,其中手工吻合3例,动力吻合1例。每组各有1例患者需要再入院。与手工吻合器吻合术相比,3例动力吻合器吻合术患者需要较多的镇痛药和较多的抗生素,但无统计学意义。电动订书机和手动订书机患者的平均疼痛评分分别为2.96分和2.92分(p<0.851),平均住院时间分别为7.04分和6.1分(p<0.08)。结论:在我们的初步研究中,动力订书机是安全有效的,没有任何额外的并发症和不良事件。我们观察到手工订书机组术中并发症发生率相当,术后并发症发生率有较高的趋势。
A Comparative Study of The Clinical Outcomes Using Conventional Manual Staplers and Circular Powered Staplers in Patients Undergoing Left Sided Colorectal Anastomosis
Aim: The aim of our study was to assess safety and efficacy of powered circular staplers for colorectal anastomosis and its comparison with conventional (manual staplers). Method: It’s a single institute, single surgeon based retrospective study to compare powered staplers with manual for the patient’s undergoing anastomosis in colorectal surgery. We assessed the two techniques on the basis of type of surgery, technical problems, intraoperative leak, post-operative leak, blood transfusion, post-operative complication rates, adverse events, additional use of analgesics, antibiotics and readmission rates. SPSS version 20 was used to perform the statistical analysis. Result: Study consisted of forty- eight patients who underwent surgery for colorectal disease. Mean operating time was same for both the groups (3.33 hours). One post-operative leak was observed in manual stapler anastomosis. Four patients had complications including anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, wound infection and perianal pain in our study, amongst them three patients underwent manual anastomosis while one patient underwent powered anastomosis. One patient in each arm required readmission. Three patients who underwent powered stapler anastomosis required higher analgesics and higher antibiotics as compared to none in manual, however it was not statistically significant. The mean pain score for patient in powered stapler and manual stapler was 2.96 and 2.92 respectively(p<0.851), while mean length of stay was 7.04 for powered and 6.1 for manual stapler(p<0.08). Conclusion: In our preliminary study, powered stapler was safe and efficacious without any added complications and adverse events. We observed comparable intraoperative and higher trends of post-operative complication rates in manual stapler group.