Double-stapled anastomosis without "dog-ears" reduces the anastomotic leakage in laparoscopic anterior resection of rectal cancer: A prospective, randomized, controlled study

Association Between Cross-Stapling Technique in Mechanical Colorectal Anastomosis and Short-term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The double-stapled technique is the most common method of colorectal anastomosis in minimally invasive surgery. Several modifications to the conventional technique have been described to reduce the intersection between the stapled lines, as the resulting lateral dog-ears are considered possible risk factors for anastomotic leakage.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze the outcomes of patients receiving conventional versus modified stapled colorectal anastomosis after minimally invasive surgery.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of the published literature was undertaken. PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Embase databases were screened up to July 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Relevant articles were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Articles reporting on the outcomes of patients with modified stapled colorectal reconstruction compared with the conventional method of double-stapled anastomosis were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Conventional double-stapling colorectal anastomosis and modified techniques with reduced intersection between the stapled lines were compared.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The rate of anastomotic leak was the primary end point of interest. Perioperative details including postoperative morbidity were also appraised.

RESULTS

There were 2537 patients from 12 studies included for data extraction, with no significant differences in age, BMI, or proportion of high ASA score between patients who had conventional versus modified techniques of reconstructions. The risk of anastomotic leak was 62% lower for the modified procedure than for the conventional procedure (OR = 0.38 [95% CI, 0.26-0.56]). The incidences of overall postoperative morbidity (OR = 0.57 [95% CI, 0.45-0.73]) and major morbidity (OR = 0.48 [95% CI, 0.32-0.72]) following modified stapled anastomosis were significantly lower than following conventional double-stapled anastomosis.

LIMITATIONS

The retrospective nature of most included studies is a main limitation, essentially because of the lack of randomization and the risk of selection and detection bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence supports the modification of the conventional double-stapled technique with the elimination of 1 of both dog-ears as it is associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic-related morbidity.

The bow tie technique for single stapled colorectal anastomosis: technical note

AIM

In this technical note we describe a simplified totally transabdominal technique to perform a single stapled end-to-end colorectal anastomosis without the need for transanal transection, linear stapler line resection, purse string or dog-ear suturing.

METHOD

The rationale and the technique itself are first explained by using a schematic design. Next, step-by-step pictures of one of our cases show the feasibility and advantages of this technique. At the end, the limits of this technique are illustrated.

RESULTS

The technique was used for 20 colorectal anastomosis, 9 benign and 11 oncological cases. Median age was 68 years and average BMI was 28 kg/m2. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage were reported in 10 cases. The bow tie technique was performed in every case and the linear stapler line was entirely resected in all cases. No positive air leak test or anastomotic leakage was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The bow tie technique is a feasible technique to perform an end-to-end single stapled colorectal anastomosis with promising results on anastomotic leakage. Further research with larger prospective data collection is necessary to validate this technique and show its potential benefit on anastomotic leakage.

Efficacy of reinforcing sutures for prevention of anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Anastomotic leakage is a serious complication following surgery for cancer of the rectum. It is not clear whether reinforcing sutures could prevent anastomotic leakage. Therefore, this study aims at evaluating the efficacy of reinforcing sutures on anastomotic leakage.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases from inception to January 31, 2023. We included studies comparing anastomosis with reinforcing sutures to anastomosis without reinforcing sutures after low anterior resection. Risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane tool for RCTs and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies (ROBINS)-I tool for observational studies. The overall quality of evidence for primary outcome was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluations methodology.

RESULTS

Two RCTs (345 patients) and four observational studies (783 patients) were included. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 4.4% (24 of 548) of patients with reinforcing sutures and 11.9% (69 of 580) of patients without reinforcing sutures. Meta-analysis showed a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage (RR, 0.41; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.66, low certainty) in patients with reinforcing sutures. Operative time (WMD, -3.66; 95% CI -18.58 to 11.25) and reoperation for anastomotic leakage (RR, 0.69; 95% CI 0.23 to 2.08) were similar between patients with reinforcing sutures and those without reinforcing sutures.

CONCLUSIONS

While observational data suggest that, there is a clear benefit in terms of reducing the risk of anastomotic leakage with the use of reinforcing sutures, RCT data are less clear. Further large, prospective studies are warranted to determine whether a true clinically important benefit exists with this technique.