Single Layer versus Double Layer Technique for Intestinal Anastomosis: A Comparative Study

B. Adhikari
{"title":"Single Layer versus Double Layer Technique for Intestinal Anastomosis: A Comparative Study","authors":"B. Adhikari","doi":"10.3126/jngmc.v19i2.42792","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Intestinal anastomosis is a surgical procedure executed to ascertain communication between two segments of the intestine, after the removal of pathology affecting the bowel. It depends on factors like anastomosis site, bowel capability and the type of the pathogenesis.\nAims: To compare single versus double layer method in terms of time taken for anastomosis, hospital stay, post-operative leak and cost effectiveness.\nMethods: This is a comparative hospital based study carried out at the department of surgery Nepalgunj Medical College from September 2017 to August 2020. Patients requiring emergency laparotomy with resection and anastomosis of small bowel were included. Patients requiring colonic anastomosis, diversion stoma and multiple anastomoses were excluded. Patients were divided in to two groups- single layer and double layer group. Each group was compared for outcome measures like time taken to construct the anastomosis, hospital stay, post-operative leak and cost of surgery.\nResults: The total number of patients was 50. The mean age was 45.57±17.42 years for single layer and 48.67±18.16 years for double layer group. Time taken for intestinal anostomosis in single and double layer were 18.28±5.08 and 25.27±6.18 respectively which was statistically significant (p - <0.012). Hospital stay was 10.9±1.43 in single layer and 11.2±1.87 which was statistically not significant (p - >0.342). Similarly, the anastomosis leak was seen in 2 patients in single layer and 3 in double layer. Which was statistically not significant (p - >0.318). While comparing the cost effectiveness single layer technique was cost effective.\nConclusion: The single layer anastomosis is a preferable, safe and economic technique in comparison to the conventional double layered anastomosis.","PeriodicalId":166882,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nepalgunj Medical College","volume":"112 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nepalgunj Medical College","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3126/jngmc.v19i2.42792","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Intestinal anastomosis is a surgical procedure executed to ascertain communication between two segments of the intestine, after the removal of pathology affecting the bowel. It depends on factors like anastomosis site, bowel capability and the type of the pathogenesis. Aims: To compare single versus double layer method in terms of time taken for anastomosis, hospital stay, post-operative leak and cost effectiveness. Methods: This is a comparative hospital based study carried out at the department of surgery Nepalgunj Medical College from September 2017 to August 2020. Patients requiring emergency laparotomy with resection and anastomosis of small bowel were included. Patients requiring colonic anastomosis, diversion stoma and multiple anastomoses were excluded. Patients were divided in to two groups- single layer and double layer group. Each group was compared for outcome measures like time taken to construct the anastomosis, hospital stay, post-operative leak and cost of surgery. Results: The total number of patients was 50. The mean age was 45.57±17.42 years for single layer and 48.67±18.16 years for double layer group. Time taken for intestinal anostomosis in single and double layer were 18.28±5.08 and 25.27±6.18 respectively which was statistically significant (p - <0.012). Hospital stay was 10.9±1.43 in single layer and 11.2±1.87 which was statistically not significant (p - >0.342). Similarly, the anastomosis leak was seen in 2 patients in single layer and 3 in double layer. Which was statistically not significant (p - >0.318). While comparing the cost effectiveness single layer technique was cost effective. Conclusion: The single layer anastomosis is a preferable, safe and economic technique in comparison to the conventional double layered anastomosis.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
单层与双层肠吻合术的比较研究
肠吻合术是一种外科手术,目的是在去除影响肠道的病理后,确定两段肠道之间的沟通。它取决于诸如吻合部位,肠功能和发病机制类型等因素。目的:比较单层吻合术与双层吻合术在吻合时间、住院时间、术后漏损及成本效益等方面的差异。方法:本研究是2017年9月至2020年8月在尼泊尔君医学院外科开展的一项基于比较医院的研究。包括需要紧急剖腹手术并小肠切除吻合的患者。排除需要结肠吻合、分流口及多次吻合的患者。患者分为单层组和双层组。对每组的结果进行比较,如建造吻合口所需的时间、住院时间、术后泄漏和手术费用。结果:患者总数50例。单层组平均年龄45.57±17.42岁,双层组平均年龄48.67±18.16岁。单、双层肠造口时间分别为18.28±5.08、25.27±6.18,差异有统计学意义(p - 0.342)。单层吻合口渗漏2例,双层吻合口渗漏3例。差异无统计学意义(p - >0.318)。在比较成本效益的同时,单层技术的成本效益更高。结论:单层吻合术与传统的双层吻合术相比,是一种安全、经济的吻合术。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Study of the Relationship of Lipid Profile, BMI and Blood Pressure among Non-diabetic Hypertensive Patients - A Hospital Based Study Comparative Study of Opioid Free versus Opioid Anaesthesia in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Radiopathological Correlation in Diagnosis of Adnexal Lesions: A Hospital Based Comparative Study Correlation of Mastoid Pneumatization with Middle Ear Pathology in Unilateral Squamous Type of Chronic Otitis Media Functional Outcome of Isolated Middle to Distal Third Ulnar Shaft Fracture in Adults with Square Nail Fixation
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1