Efficacy and safety of V-Loc™ barbed sutures versus conventional suture techniques in gynecological surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

One of the most challenging tasks in laparoscopic gynecological surgeries is suturing. Knotless barbed sutures are intended to enable faster suturing and hemostasis. We carried out a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of V-Loc™ barbed sutures (VBS) with conventional sutures (CS) in gynecological surgeries.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE for studies published between 2010 and September 2021 comparing VBS to CS for OB/GYN procedures. All comparative studies were included. Primary analysis and subgroup analyses for the different surgery and suturing types were performed. Primary outcomes were operation time and suture time; secondary outcomes included post-operative complications, surgical site infections, estimated blood loss, length of stay, granulation tissue formation, and surgical difficulty. Results were calculated as weighted mean difference (WMD) or risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with a random effects model, and a sensitivity analysis for study quality, study size, and outlier results was performed. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022363187.

RESULTS

In total, 25 studies involving 4452 women undergoing hysterectomy, myomectomy, or excision of endometrioma. VBS were associated with a reduction in operation time (WMD - 17.08 min; 95% CI - 21.57, - 12.59), suture time (WMD - 5.39 min; 95% CI - 7.06, - 3.71), surgical site infection (RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.09, 0.78), estimated blood loss (WMD - 44.91 ml; 95% CI - 66.01, - 23.81), granulation tissue formation (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.25, 0.89), and surgical difficulty (WMD - 1.98 VAS score; 95% CI - 2.83, - 1.13). No difference between VBS and CS was found regarding total postoperative complications or length of stay. Many of the outcomes showed high heterogeneity, likely due to the inclusion of different surgery types and comparators. Most results were shown to be robust in the sensitivity analysis except for the reduction in granulation tissue formation.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis indicates that V-Loc™ barbed sutures are safe and effective in gynecological surgeries as they reduce operation time, suture time, blood loss, infections, and surgical difficulty without increasing post-operative complications or length of stay compared to conventional sutures.

Evaluating the Environmental Impact of Single-Use and Multi-Use Surgical Staplers with Staple Line Buttressing in Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery

PURPOSE

Operation rooms have a large environmental impact. Single-use staplers (SUS) are widely used surgical instruments that contribute to resource consumption and waste generation, whereas multi-use staplers (MUS) can greatly reduce the environmental impact of surgery. The staple lines are often reinforced with buttressing material to prevent leaks and bleeding. We explore current clinical practice and environmental concerns regarding stapling and buttressing, as well as the environmental impact of staple line buttressing in sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Furthermore, we extend this analysis by taking packaging material and the lithium in power supplies into consideration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A survey of bariatric surgeons was conducted to assess stapler and buttressing use in clinical practice. We deconstructed and analyzed the product and packaging composition of a commonly used SUS with separate staple line reinforcement (Echelon Flex™ with Echelon Endopath™, Ethicon) and MUS (Signia™ with Tri-Staple™ reinforced reloads, Medtronic), where the buttressing material was delivered separately or already incorporated in the reload cartridge, respectively. Both systems were compared regarding total waste generation, resource use (determined as total material requirement), and greenhouse gas emission caused by their lithium content.

RESULTS

60 mm cartridges were most frequently used in bariatric surgery, and 67% of surveyed surgeons applied staple line reinforcement. MUS with pre-attached buttressing resulted in a reduction of waste, material consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions compared to SUS with separate buttressing: they reduced product waste by 40% (SG and RYBG), packaging waste by 60% (SG) and 57% (RYGB), resource consumption by more than 90%, and greenhouse gas emissions related to the lithium in the batteries by 99.7%. Preloaded buttressing produced less waste than separate buttressing per stapler firing.

CONCLUSION

The environmental impact of surgery can be greatly reduced by using MUS with pre-attached buttressing rather than SUS with separate buttressing.

Cost-effectiveness of mechanical thromboprophylaxis for cesarean deliveries in Brazil

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using mechanical thromboprophylaxis for patients undergoing a cesarean delivery in Brazil.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model built in TreeAge software was used to compare the cost and effectiveness of intermittent pneumatic compression to prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin or no prophylaxis from the perspective of the hospital. Related adverse events were venous thromboembolism, minor bleeding, and major bleeding. Model data were sourced from peer-reviewed studies through a structured literature search. A willingness-to-pay threshold of R$15,000 per avoided adverse event was adopted. Scenario, one-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the impact of uncertainties on the results.

RESULTS

The costs of care related to venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and associated adverse events ranged from R$914 for no prophylaxis to R$1,301 for low-molecular-weight heparin. With an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of R$7,843 per adverse event avoided. Intermittent pneumatic compression was cost-effective compared to no prophylaxis. With lower costs and improved effectiveness, intermittent pneumatic compression dominated low-molecular-weight heparin. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that the probability of being cost-effective was comparable for intermittent pneumatic compression and no prophylaxis, with low-molecular-weight heparin unlikely to be considered cost-effective (0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Intermittent pneumatic compression could be a cost-effective option and is likely to be more appropriate than low-molecular-weight heparin when used for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for cesarean delivery in Brazil. Use of thromboprophylaxis should be a risk-stratified, individualized approach.

Fast In-House Next-Generation Sequencing in the Diagnosis of Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Hospital Budget Impact Analysis

Background: Targeted therapy for cancer is becoming more frequent as the understanding of the molecular pathogenesis increases. Molecular testing must be done to use targeted therapy. Unfortunately, the testing turnaround time can delay the initiation of targeted therapy. Objective: To investigate the impact of a next-generation sequencing (NGS) machine in the hospital that would allow for in-house NGS testing of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) in a US setting. Methods: The differences between 2 hospital pathways were established with a cohort-level decision tree that feeds into a Markov model. A pathway that used in-house NGS (75%) and the use of external laboratories (so-called send-out NGS) (25%), was compared with the standard of exclusively send-out NGS. The model was from the perspective of a US hospital over a 5-year time horizon. All cost input data were in or inflated to 2021 USD. Scenario analysis was done on key variables. Results: In a hospital with 500 mNSCLC patients, the implementation of in-house NGS was estimated to increase the testing costs and the revenue of the hospital. The model predicted a $710 060 increase in testing costs, a $1 732 506 increase in revenue, and a $1 022 446 return on investment over 5 years. The payback period was 15 months with in-house NGS. The number of patients on targeted therapy increased by 3.38%, and the average turnaround time decreased by 10 days when in-house NGS was used. Discussion: Reducing testing turnaround time is a benefit of in-house NGS. It could contribute to fewer mNSCLC patients lost to second opinion and an increased number of patients on targeted therapy. The model outcomes predicted that, over a 5-year period, there would be a positive return on investment for a US hospital. The model reflects a proposed scenario. The heterogeneity of hospital inputs and the cost of send-out NGS means context-specific inputs are needed. Conclusion: Using in-house NGS testing could reduce the testing turnaround time and increase the number of patients on targeted therapy. Additional benefits for the hospital are that fewer patients will be lost to second opinion and that in-house NGS could generate additional revenue.