Nam Seok Kim, Ji Hoon Kim, Yoon Suk Lee, In Kyu Lee, Won Kyung Kang
{"title":"腹腔镜低位前路切除术中的新型无钉交叉线双层缝合技术:减少吻合口漏的努力。","authors":"Nam Seok Kim, Ji Hoon Kim, Yoon Suk Lee, In Kyu Lee, Won Kyung Kang","doi":"10.3393/ac.2022.00409.0058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to demonstrate the safety of new double-stapling technique (nDST), without a crossing line and dog ears, by comparing with conventional DST (cDST) in laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed 98 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic LAR for rectal cancer from January 2018 to December 2020. The inclusion criterion was an anastomosis level below the peritoneal reflection and 4 cm above the anal verge. In the nDST group, the staple line of the linear cutter was sutured using barbed sutures to shorten the staple line before firing the circular stapler. Therefore, there were no crossing lines after firing the circular stapler. A 2:1 propensity score matching was performed between the cDST and nDST groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After propensity score matching, 39 patients were in the cDST group and 20 were in the nDST group. There were no significant differences in patient demographics between the 2 groups. There was no difference in the total operation time between the cDST and nDST groups (124.0±26.2 minutes vs. 125.2±20.3 minutes, P=0.853). Morbidity rates were similar between the 2 groups (9 cases [23.1%] vs. 5 cases [25.0%], P=0.855). There was no significant difference in leakage rate (4 cases [10.3%] vs. 1 case [5.0%], P=0.847) and anastomotic bleeding rate (1 case [2.6%] vs. 3 cases [15.0%], P=0.211).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The nDST to eliminate the crossing line and dog ears in laparoscopic LAR is technically feasible and safe. However, more attention should be paid to anastomotic bleeding in such cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":8267,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Coloproctology","volume":" ","pages":"573-579"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New double-stapling technique without staple-crossing line in laparoscopic low anterior resection: effort to reduce anastomotic leakage.\",\"authors\":\"Nam Seok Kim, Ji Hoon Kim, Yoon Suk Lee, In Kyu Lee, Won Kyung Kang\",\"doi\":\"10.3393/ac.2022.00409.0058\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to demonstrate the safety of new double-stapling technique (nDST), without a crossing line and dog ears, by comparing with conventional DST (cDST) in laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed 98 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic LAR for rectal cancer from January 2018 to December 2020. The inclusion criterion was an anastomosis level below the peritoneal reflection and 4 cm above the anal verge. In the nDST group, the staple line of the linear cutter was sutured using barbed sutures to shorten the staple line before firing the circular stapler. Therefore, there were no crossing lines after firing the circular stapler. A 2:1 propensity score matching was performed between the cDST and nDST groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After propensity score matching, 39 patients were in the cDST group and 20 were in the nDST group. There were no significant differences in patient demographics between the 2 groups. There was no difference in the total operation time between the cDST and nDST groups (124.0±26.2 minutes vs. 125.2±20.3 minutes, P=0.853). Morbidity rates were similar between the 2 groups (9 cases [23.1%] vs. 5 cases [25.0%], P=0.855). There was no significant difference in leakage rate (4 cases [10.3%] vs. 1 case [5.0%], P=0.847) and anastomotic bleeding rate (1 case [2.6%] vs. 3 cases [15.0%], P=0.211).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The nDST to eliminate the crossing line and dog ears in laparoscopic LAR is technically feasible and safe. However, more attention should be paid to anastomotic bleeding in such cases.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Coloproctology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"573-579\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Coloproctology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2022.00409.0058\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2022.00409.0058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:本研究旨在通过与腹腔镜低位前切除术(LAR)中的传统 DST(cDST)进行比较,证明无交叉线和狗耳的新型双缝合技术(nDST)的安全性:我们对 2018 年 1 月至 2020 年 12 月期间接受腹腔镜直肠癌 LAR 的 98 例连续患者进行了回顾性研究。纳入标准为吻合水平低于腹膜反光且高于肛缘 4 厘米。在 nDST 组中,线性切割器的订书线在发射圆形订书机前使用倒钩缝合线缝合,以缩短订书线。因此,发射环形订书机后不会出现交叉线。在 cDST 组和 nDST 组之间进行了 2:1 的倾向得分匹配:倾向得分匹配后,cDST 组有 39 名患者,nDST 组有 20 名患者。两组患者的人口统计学特征无明显差异。cDST 组和 nDST 组的总手术时间无差异(124.0±26.2 分钟 vs. 125.2±20.3 分钟,P=0.853)。两组的发病率相似(9 例 [23.1%] vs. 5 例 [25.0%],P=0.855)。漏血率(4 例 [10.3%] vs. 1 例 [5.0%],P=0.847)和吻合口出血率(1 例 [2.6%] vs. 3 例 [15.0%],P=0.211)无明显差异:结论:在腹腔镜 LAR 中使用 nDST 消除交叉线和狗耳在技术上是可行和安全的。结论:在腹腔镜 LAR 中采用 nDST 消除交叉线和狗耳在技术上是可行和安全的,但应更加注意此类病例中的吻合口出血。
New double-stapling technique without staple-crossing line in laparoscopic low anterior resection: effort to reduce anastomotic leakage.
Purpose: This study aimed to demonstrate the safety of new double-stapling technique (nDST), without a crossing line and dog ears, by comparing with conventional DST (cDST) in laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR).
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 98 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic LAR for rectal cancer from January 2018 to December 2020. The inclusion criterion was an anastomosis level below the peritoneal reflection and 4 cm above the anal verge. In the nDST group, the staple line of the linear cutter was sutured using barbed sutures to shorten the staple line before firing the circular stapler. Therefore, there were no crossing lines after firing the circular stapler. A 2:1 propensity score matching was performed between the cDST and nDST groups.
Results: After propensity score matching, 39 patients were in the cDST group and 20 were in the nDST group. There were no significant differences in patient demographics between the 2 groups. There was no difference in the total operation time between the cDST and nDST groups (124.0±26.2 minutes vs. 125.2±20.3 minutes, P=0.853). Morbidity rates were similar between the 2 groups (9 cases [23.1%] vs. 5 cases [25.0%], P=0.855). There was no significant difference in leakage rate (4 cases [10.3%] vs. 1 case [5.0%], P=0.847) and anastomotic bleeding rate (1 case [2.6%] vs. 3 cases [15.0%], P=0.211).
Conclusion: The nDST to eliminate the crossing line and dog ears in laparoscopic LAR is technically feasible and safe. However, more attention should be paid to anastomotic bleeding in such cases.