Impact of the number of stapler firings on anastomotic leakage in laparoscopic rectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (9) ◽  
pp. 919-925 ◽  
Author(s):  
Z. Balciscueta ◽  
N. Uribe ◽  
L. Caubet ◽  
M. López ◽  
I. Torrijo ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-56
Author(s):  
Yoshie Tanaka ◽  
Shigeru Yamagishi ◽  
Shinsuke Suzuki ◽  
Keita Nakatsutsumi ◽  
Hiroyasu Shimizu ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. 662-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
H.-C. Pommergaard ◽  
B. Gessler ◽  
J. Burcharth ◽  
E. Angenete ◽  
E. Haglind ◽  
...  

Oncotarget ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 12717-12729 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiabin Zheng ◽  
Xingyu Feng ◽  
Zifeng Yang ◽  
Weixian Hu ◽  
Yuwen Luo ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Adamantios Michalinos ◽  
Stavros A Antoniou ◽  
Dimitrios Ntourakis ◽  
Dimitrios Schizas ◽  
Konstantinos Ekmektzoglou ◽  
...  

Summary Anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy is a severe and life-threatening complication. Gastric ischemic preconditioning is a strategy for the improvement of anastomotic healing. Aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to investigate the impact of gastric ischemic preconditioning on postoperative morbidity. A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies comparing patients undergoing gastric ischemic preconditioning before esophagectomy with nonpreconditioned patients. Meta-analysis was conducted for the overall incidence of anastomotic leakage, severe anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, postoperative morbidity, and mortality. Mantel–Haenszel odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Subgroup analyses were performed concerning preconditioning technique, the interval between preconditioning and surgery and the extent of preconditioning. Fifteen cohort studies were identified. Gastric preconditioning was associated with reduced overall incidence of anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI, 0.53–1.0; P = 0.050) and severe anastomotic leakage (OR 0.27; 95% CI, 0.14–0.50; P < 0.010), but not with anastomotic stricture (OR 1.18; 95% CI 0.38 to 3.66; P = 0.780), major postoperative morbidity (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.45 to 2.36; P = 0.940) or mortality (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.39 to 1,23; P = 0.210). Subgroup analyses did not identify any differences between embolization and ligation while increasing the interval between preconditioning and esophagectomy as well as the extent of preconditioning might be beneficial. Gastric ischemic preconditioning may be associated with a reduced incidence of overall and severe anastomotic leakage. Randomized studies are necessary to further evaluate its impact on leakage, refine the technique and define patient populations that will benefit the most.


Endoscopy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (08) ◽  
pp. 632-642 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pasquale Scognamiglio ◽  
Matthias Reeh ◽  
Karl Karstens ◽  
Eugen Bellon ◽  
Marcus Kantowski ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Esophageal anastomotic leakage still represents a challenging complication after esophageal surgery. Endoscopically placed self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) are the treatment of choice, but since the introduction of endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) for esophageal leakage 10 years ago, increasing evidence has demonstrated that EVT might be a superior alternative. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and related morbidity of SEMS and EVT in the treatment of esophageal leak. Methods We systematically searched for studies comparing SEMS and EVT to treat anastomotic leakage after esophageal surgery. Predefined end points including outcome, treatment success, endoscopy, treatment duration, hospitalization time, morbidity, and mortality were assessed and included in the meta-analysis. Results Five retrospective studies including 274 patients matched the inclusion criteria. Compared with stenting, EVT was significantly associated with a higher rate of leak closure (odds ratio [OR] 3.14, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.23 to 7.98), more endoscopic device changes (pooled median difference of 3.09; 95 %CI 1.54 to 4.64]), a shorter duration of treatment (pooled median difference –11.90 days; 95 %CI –18.59 to –5.21 days), and a lower mortality rate (OR 0.39, 95 %CI 0.18 to 0.83). There were no significant differences in short-term and major complications. Conclusions Owing to the retrospective quality of the studies with potential biases, the results of the meta-analysis must be interpreted with caution. However, the analysis indicates the potential benefit of EVT, which should be further investigated with standardized and prospectively collected data.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document