Circular versus linear stapling oesophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic total gastrectomy. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author(s):  
Marco Milone ◽  
Ugo Elmore ◽  
Michele Manigrasso ◽  
Sara Vertaldi ◽  
Giovanni Aprea ◽  
...  
2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 1509-1520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonie Haverkamp ◽  
Teus J. Weijs ◽  
Pieter C. van der Sluis ◽  
Ingeborg van der Tweel ◽  
Jelle P. Ruurda ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. e028216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tianyou Liao ◽  
Leilei Deng ◽  
Xueqing Yao ◽  
Manzhao Ouyang

IntroductionTotal gastrectomy is often recommended for upper body gastric cancer, and totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) is deemed to be a promising surgical method with the well-known advantages such as less invasion and fast recovery. However, the anastomosis between oesophagus and jejunum is the difficulty of TLTG. Although staplers have promoted the development of TLTG, the choice of suitable staplers to complete oesophagojejunostomy is controversial and unclear. Therefore, a higher level of research evidence is needed to compare the two types of staplers in terms of safety and efficacy for oesophagojejunostomy in TLTG among patients with gastric cancer.Methods and analysisPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang Databases will be comprehensively searched from January 1990 to July 2019. All eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs or observational studies comparing the two types of staplers will be included. A meta-analysis will be performed using Review Manager V.5.3 software to compare the safety and efficacy of linear and circular staplers for oesophagojejunostomy in TLTG. The primary outcomes are anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, anastomotic haemorrhage. The secondary outcomes include time to first instance of passing gas after surgery, first feeding time, total operation time, reconstruction time, estimated blood loss. The heterogeneity of this study will be assessed by p values and I2statistic. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses will be used to explore and explain the heterogeneity. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane tool or the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be required because this proposed systematic review and meta-analysis is based on previously published data, which does not include intervention data on patients. The findings of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at a relevant congress.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018111680.


2009 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 2838-2851 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralf Gertler ◽  
Robert Rosenberg ◽  
Marcus Feith ◽  
Tibor Schuster ◽  
Helmut Friess

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document