How Does Oversewing/Suturing (OS/S) Compare to Other Staple Line Reinforcement Methods? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Various staple line reinforcement (SLR) techniques in sleeve gastrectomy, including oversewing/suturing (OS/S), gluing, and buttressing, have emerged to mitigate postoperative complications such as bleeding and leaks. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials has demonstrated OS/S as an efficacious strategy for preventing postoperative complications, encompassing leaks, bleeding, and reoperations. Given that OS/S is the sole SLR technique not incurring additional costs during surgery, our study aimed to compare postoperative outcomes associated with OS/S versus alternative SLR methods. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we reviewed the literature and conducted fifteen pairwise meta-analyses of comparative studies, each evaluating an outcome between OS/S and another SLR technique. Thirteen of these analyses showed no statistically significant differences, whereas two revealed notable distinctions.

Factors Related to Bleeding and Leak Rates After Robotic Sleeve Gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Robotic sleeve gastrectomy has been increasing in annual incidence in recent years. Although rare, post op bleeding and leak in these cases can lead to significant morbidity, mortality, and healthcare utilization.

OBJECTIVES

To determine preop comorbidity risk factors and operative techniques associated with risk of bleeding or leak within 30 days of robotic sleeve gastrectomy.

METHODS

The MBSAQIP database was analyzed. A total of 53,548 RSG cases were included in analysis. Surgeries took place from accredited centers in the USA from 2015 to 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative anticoagulation, renal failure, COPD, and OSA were found to increase in the risk for transfusion requirements after SG. Receiving a transfusion and smoking increased the risk for leak. Staple line reinforcement significantly decreased transfusion and leak rates. Staple line oversewing did not have an impact on bleeding or leak.

Oversewing/Suturing of the Staple Line During Sleeve Gastrectomy Is an Effective and Affordable Staple Line Reinforcement Method: a Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Bleeding and leaks are the most ominous postoperative complications after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Various staple line reinforcement (SLR) techniques have been innovated such as oversewing/suturing (OS/S), omentopexy/gastropexy, buttressing, and gluing. Currently, no high-quality evidence supports the use of one method over the others or even supports the use of SLR over no SLR. This study aimed to compare postoperative outcomes between LSG with OS/S versus LSG without any SLR.

Seamguard Buttressing of the Staple Line During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Appears to Decrease the Incidence of Postoperative Bleeding, Leaks, and Reoperations. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Non-Randomized Comparative Studies

Leaks and bleeding are major acute postoperative complications following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Various staple line reinforcement (SLR) methods have been invented such as oversewing/suturing (OS/S), omentopexy/gastropexy (OP/GP), gluing, and buttressing. However, many surgeons do not use any type of reinforcement. On the other hand, surgeons who use a reinforcement method are often confused of what kind of reinforcement they should use. No robust and high-quality data supports the use of one reinforcement over the other or even supports the use of reinforcement over no-reinforcement. Therefore, SLR is a controversial topic that is worth our focus. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of LSG with versus without Seamguard buttressing of the staple line during LSG.

Comparison of robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy outcomes in multiple staple line treatment modalities from 2015 to 2019: a 5-year propensity score-adjusted MBSAQIP® analysis

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy (RSG) is an increasingly common approach to sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Staple line reinforcement (SLR) is well-discussed in laparoscopic SG literature, but not RSG- likely due to the absence of dedicated robotic SLR devices. However, most RSG cases report SLR. This retrospective analysis compares outcomes in RSG cases reporting (1) any staple line treatment (SLT) vs none and (2) SLR vs oversewing.

METHODS

MBSAQIP was queried for adults who underwent RSG from 2015 to 2019. Open procedures, Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery, hand-assisted, single-incision, concurrent procedures, and illogical BMIs were excluded (n = 3444). Final sample included 52,354 patients. Two comparisons were made: SLT (n = 34,886) vs none (n = 17,468) and SLR (n = 22,217) vs oversew (n = 5620). We fitted multivariable regression models to estimate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) and performed propensity score analysis with inverse probability of treatment weight based on patient factors.

RESULTS

Most RSG cases utilized SLT (66.6%). Cases with SLT had a reduced risk of organ space SSI (RR 0.68 [0.49, 0.94]), 30-day reoperation (RR 0.77 [0.64, 0.93]), 30-day re-intervention (RR 0.80 [0.67, 0.96]), sepsis (RR 0.58 [0.35, 0.96]), unplanned intubation (RR 0.59 [0.37, 0.93]), extended ventilator use (RR 0.46 [0.23, 0.91]), and renal failure (RR 0.40 [0.19, 0.82]) compared to no-treatment cases. In single-treatment cases (n = 27,837), most utilized SLR (79.8%). Cases with oversew had a higher risk of any SSI (RR 1.70 [1.19, 2.42]), superficial incisional SSI (RR 1.71 [1.06, 2.76]), septic shock (RR 6.47 [2.11, 19.87]), unplanned intubation (RR 2.18 [1.06, 4.47]), and extended ventilator use (> 48 h) (RR 4.55 [1.63, 12.71]) than SLR.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest SLT in RSG is associated with reduced risk of some adverse outcomes vs no-treatment. Among SLT, SLR demonstrated lower risk than oversewing. However, risk of all-cause mortality, cardiac arrest, and unplanned ICU admission were not significant.

Is staple line reinforcement still needed on contemporary staplers? A benchtop analysis

BACKGROUND

Staple line reinforcement (SLR) is commonly used in bariatric surgeries to reduce leaks and bleeds. With the evolution of staplers, the need for buttressing with the latest surgical stapling technology is in question. The efficacy of GORE® SEAMGUARD® (G-SLR) to improve staple line strength based on an established measure of burst pressure was evaluated. A benchtop test on synthetic tissue evaluated the pressure required for staple line leak across surgical staplers with and without G-SLR.

METHODS

Staple lines on a consistent thickness synthetic bowel were pressurized to the point of failure (burst pressure) among Ethicon®, Intuitive®, and Medtronic® surgical staplers with and without G-SLR. Burst pressure and leak location (through the staple line [TTSL] or through the staple [TTS], on the anvil or cartridge side) were recorded. Visual confirmation of a leak concluded each test.

RESULTS

The pooled mean burst pressure for G-SLR was greater (p < 0.05) by 0.494 pounds/square inch compared with no reinforcement with no meaningful differences among staplers. Leak failures were primarily TTS (91.7%) and equally distributed between reinforcement groups with more leak failures on the cartridge side with G-SLR and on the anvil side for non-SLR group. Leaks occurred across the length of staple lines with no discernable pattern.

CONCLUSION

Employing a buttressing material strengthens the staple line, as measured by burst pressure, and may reduce the risk for staple line failure. This benchtop study of G-SLR with three commonly used surgical staplers demonstrated a significant increase in burst pressures among the studied stapling devices.

Partial staple line reinforcement with synthetic buttressing material in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis

PURPOSE

Staple line leakage (SLL) and staple line bleeding (SLB) are the most relevant postoperative complications of sleeve gastrectomy (SG). It is controversial whether and which method of staple line reinforcement (SLR) can best reduce these complications. The primary objective of this study was to investigate whether reinforcement of the most proximal part of the staple line with synthetic buttressing material, a strategy we termed partial SLR (p-SLR), reduces the 30-day incidence of SLL.

METHODS

A retrospective search of medical records of all bariatric patients from 2010 to 2019 was performed. Patients who underwent SG with either p-SLR or non-SLR were included. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed before and after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

Data from 431 patients were analyzed (364 in the p-SLR group and 67 in the non-SLR group). No difference in the 30-day incidence of SLL was observed between the two groups. The 30-day incidence of SLB (1.1% vs. 6.0% in the p-SLR and non-SLR groups, respectively) was significantly lower in the p-SLR group. These results were confirmed by PSM analysis.

CONCLUSION

Partial staple line reinforcement with synthetic buttressing material does not reduce the 30-day incidence of SLL. Although our analysis showed a significant reduction in the 30-day incidence of SLB in the p-SLR group, this result should be interpreted with caution.

Staple Line Reinforcement During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Purpose

Staple line reinforcement (SLR) during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is controversial. The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive evaluation of the most commonly utilized techniques for SLR.

Materials and Methods

Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare no reinforcement (NR), suture oversewing (SR), glue reinforcement (GR), bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement (Gore® Seamguard®) (GoR), and clips reinforcement (CR). Risk Ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used as pooled effect size measures.

Results

Overall, 3994 patients (17 RCTs) were included. Of those, 1641 (41.1%) underwent NR, 1507 (37.7%) SR, 689 (17.2%) GR, 107 (2.7%) GoR, and 50 (1.3%) CR. SR was associated with a significantly reduced risk of bleeding (RR=0.51; 95% CrI 0.31–0.88), staple line leak (RR=0.56; 95% CrI 0.32–0.99), and overall complications (RR=0.50; 95% CrI 0.30–0.88) compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Operative time was significantly longer for SR (WMD=16.2; 95% CrI 10.8–21.7), GR (WMD=15.0; 95% CrI 7.7–22.4), and GoR (WMD=15.5; 95% CrI 5.6–25.4) compared to NR. Among treatments, there were no significant differences for surgical site infection (SSI), sleeve stenosis, reoperation, hospital length of stay, and 30-day mortality.

Conclusions

SR seems associated with a reduced risk of bleeding, leak, and overall complications compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Data regarding GoR and CR are limited while further trials reporting outcomes for these techniques are warranted.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11695-022-05950-z.

Is Staple Line Reinforcement Necessary in Conversion From Laparoscopic Adjustable Band to Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy?

BACKGROUND

Once a common bariatric procedure, laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) is more frequently the subject of conversion procedures, particularly to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), due to failure of weight loss, weight regain, and band intolerance. Staple line reinforcement (SLR) in primary LSG has been studied extensively, but has not been evaluated in revision procedures. The aim of this study is to investigate commonly used SLR techniques and their effects on morbidity and mortality in single-stage bands converted to sleeves.

METHODS

The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality and Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Participant Use Data Files (PUF) for 2015-2016 were utilized to assess data for single-stage bands converted to sleeves based on CPT codes, and records were stratified by technique of staple line reinforcement. The database contained all the defined variables utilized for analysis with the exception of leak rate and overall morbidity, which had to be derived. Thirty-day outcomes were analyzed using multiple bivariate analyses and Bonferroni corrections were applied.

RESULTS

Of the 6,286 patients who underwent single-stage bands converted to sleeves for whom SLR data is available, 56.9% of surgeons utilized SLR only, 21.3% chose no reinforcement technique (No SLR), 13.4% chose SLR plus over-sewing of the staple line (SLR+OSL), and 8.4% chose OSL alone. There were no statistically significant differences in rates of death, reoperation, readmission, reintervention, number of bleeding events, and staple line leaks across groups.

CONCLUSION

Choice of SLR does not affect number of bleeding events or staple line leak rate.

Can staple-line reinforcement eliminate the major early postoperative complications after sleeve gastrectomy?

BACKGROUND

Staple line reinforcement (SLR) is widely used to reduce major complications such as bleeding and leak after sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The present study aims to compare the running suture of SLR with a hybrid method by purse string suture of His angle, continuous inverted suture of proximal staple line and oversewing of distal staple line with omental coverage.

METHODS

This single center retrospective study included 914 patients underwent SG. Their surgical videos were reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups according to the SLR methods, including hybrid suture and running suture. The postoperative major complications, including bleeding, leak and obstruction, were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 914 patients, 384 had hybrid suture while 530 had running suture of SLR. The overall incidence of staple line bleeding and disruption was 39.2% and 4.9% after stomach transection. Hybrid suture exhibited slightly shorter SLR suture time, and required less extra suture for the hemostasis of suture site bleeding after staple line reinforcement compared to running suture. The incidence of postoperative bleeding was significantly lower after hybrid suture than after running suture (0 vs 1.3%, P = 0.02). Two patients in running suture group were complicated with postoperative leak. There was no postoperative obstruction within all patients. 1-year excessive weight loss was similar between two groups.

CONCLUSION

Despite surgical complexity, hybrid suture seemed to be able to decrease the incidence of postoperative bleeding compared to running suture. However, its role on leak and obstruction requires further clinical validation.

Trends and Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Between 2015 and 2018 in the USA and Canada

BACKGROUND

Given there are approximately 100,000 primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) procedures performed a year in North America, there is a need to evaluate recent trends in LSG. The objective of this study was to analyze the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) to identify trends in technical factors and patient outcomes over time.

METHODS

The MBSAQIP prospectively collects data from 854 centers in the USA and Canada. Patients undergoing primary LSG were included. Statistical analysis was performed to characterize trends in patient factors, technical factors, and 30-day postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 434,030 patients underwent primary LSG. The mean age was 44.2 (SD 12.0) years and mean body mass index was 45.1 (SD 7.8) kg/m². Baseline demographics did not vary appreciably by year. Operative time decreased from 2015 to 2018 (75.4 to 70.6 min, p < 0.001). Bougie size and stapling distance from the pylorus did not change by year. However, staple line reinforcement (66.8 to 63.2%, p < 0.001) and oversewing of the staple line (23.1 to 20.1%, p < 0.001) were less commonly performed. Postoperatively, from 2015 to 2018, there was a 45.8% relative reduction in leaks (0.48 to 0.26%, p < 0.001). There were also reductions in 30-day major complications (2.87 to 2.28%, p < 0.001), length of stay (1.72 to 1.44 days, p < 0.001), and readmissions (3.39 to 2.77%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

From 2015 to 2018, there was a decrease in staple line reinforcement and oversewing. These changes correlated with reductions in operative time, length of stay, readmission, and major complications.

The Impact of Staple Line Reinforcement Utilization on Bleeding and Leak Rates Following Sleeve Gastrectomy for Severe Obesity: a Propensity and Case-Control Matched Analysis. Obes Surg. 2019;29:2449-2463. [PMID: 30989567 DOI: 10.1007/s11695-019-03883-8]

INTRODUCTION

Staple line reinforcement (SLR) is a commonly used technique during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) for severe obesity. There remains controversy over the potential benefit or risk associated with SLR. There are currently no consensus recommendations about SLR use. Its use is surgeon-dependent and remains controversial.

STUDY AIM

To determine the impact of staple line reinforcement on staple line leak and bleeding rates after sleeve gastrectomy.

METHODS

Using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Quality Improvement Program Participant User File (MBSQIP-PUF) database, we identified patients who had a SG in 2015 and 2016. SLR utilization status was used to create two cohorts. An unmatched cohort analysis was performed, and the outcomes were compared. A propensity score and case-control matched cohort analysis were then performed, and the outcomes were compared. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS and SAS.

RESULTS

Of the 189,173 SG cases identified, SLR utilization was noted in 127,521 (67.4%). In the unmatched analysis, bleeding and reoperation were significantly higher in the cohort without SLR utilization. In both propensity score and case-control matched analysis, bleeding and reoperation remained significantly higher in the cohort without SLR utilization. There was no difference in mortality and staple line leak rates between the cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

SLR significantly reduces bleeding and reoperation rates following SG and has no deleterious impact on staple line leak rate. While further prospective studies factoring in the SLR method and staple characteristics are needed, this large database analysis supports the use of routine SLR during SG to reduce the risk of perioperative bleeding and reoperation.

Standardised Sleeve Gastrectomy Without Reinforcement

Background and Objectives:

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has some unique complications, the most concerning of which is sleeve leak. Staple line reinforcement (SLR) has been suggested as a means of decreasing the risk of sleeve leak, but it increases the cost. However, there is little in the literature regarding the effect of standardized operative technique in reducing the complications and improving the outcomes in LSG. We sought to demonstrate that standardization of the operative procedure and perioperative care is the key to an excellent 30-day outcome and that SLR is not necessary to ensure a negligible staple line leak and bleeding rate.

Methods:

A prospectively maintained database was analyzed to identify 303 consecutive patients undergoing LSG between July 2010 and November 2017. Data on patient demographics, length of hospital stay, conversion to open surgery, perioperative complications, and mortality were analyzed. Standardized operative technique and postoperative protocol were followed in all cases. SLR was not used in any case.

Results:

Among 303 cases, there were 15 complications (5%), 5 (1.7%) of which were severe (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3a). There were no conversions to open procedure, no staple line leaks, and no inpatient deaths in the cohort. No patient was readmitted with an early stricture.

Conclusions:

The use of a standardized operative and postoperative protocol led to an excellent early outcome in our LSG cases. Standardization may act to obviate the need for routine SLR techniques which are associated with a significant financial cost to both patient and hospital.

Incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with staple line reinforcement with oversewing and staple line inversion vs buttressing material: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting are relevant complications after restrictive bariatric procedures, such as sleeve gastrectomy, mainly secondary to a drastic reduction in the gastric volume. However, other causes can be involved. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), with staple line reinforcement with oversewing vs buttressing material.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective randomized clinical trial of all the patients undergoing LSG was performed. Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients undergoing staple line inversion (Group 1) and patients undergoing staple line reinforcement with buttressing material (Group 2). Nausea and vomiting were assessed by the Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Intensity Scale.

RESULTS

A total of 100 females were included in the study, 50 in each group. Mean operative time was 66.1 ± 11.6 min in Group 1 and 55.4 ± 9.4 in Group 2 (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in staple line leaks and bleeds between groups. The PONV intensity score at 6 h was 316.4 in Group 1 and 77.1 in Group 2 (p < 0.001). 24 h after surgery, the PONV intensity score was 86 in Group 1 and 7.9 in Group 2 (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

The reinforcement with a running suture in LSG creates more PONV and increases the duration of the symptoms during the first hours after surgery, and prevents from early oral intake in a greater number of cases, when compared with the use of buttressing material as reinforcement method.

Current role of staple line reinforcement in 30-day outcomes of primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: an analysis of MBSAQIP data, 2015-2016 PUF

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become a dominant bariatric procedure. In the past, significant leak rates prompted the search for staple line reinforcement (SLR) techniques. Previous analysis of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database for all LSG suggested a detrimental influence of SLR on leak rates and overall morbidity.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the relationship between various SLR techniques and bougie size with 30-day outcomes.

SETTING

Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program-accredited bariatric surgery hospitals.

METHODS

Using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program 2015 to 2016 Participant Use File data, primary LSG cases were divided into study groups based on surgical techniques. All variables were reported in the Participant Use File except leak rate and overall morbidity, which had to be derived. Multiple bivariate analyses were used to analyze the 30-day outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 198,339 primary LSG operations were included and grouped into No SLR (23.0%), SLR (54.2%), oversewn staple line (9.5%), and a combination of SLR + oversewn staple line (13.3%). There were no statistical differences between study groups in mortality, overall morbidity, or leak rate. Bleeding and reoperation rates were statistically higher in the No SLR group. Bougie size was not associated with change in leak rates.

CONCLUSION

Primary LSG is a safe procedure with low morbidity and mortality rates. SLR is associated with decreased rates of bleeding and reoperations but does not affect leak rates. The selection of SLR technique should be left to the surgeon's discretion with an understanding of the associated risks, benefits, and costs.

Staple Line Reinforcement in Laparoscopic SleeveGastrectomy: Experience in 1023 Consecutive Cases

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is one of the most frequently performed bariatric procedures performed worldwide. However, staple line-related complications have become a major challenge for bariatric surgeons. The aim of this study was to evaluate the morbidity in a cohort of patients who underwent LSG with imbricated oversewing of the staple line at a single high-volume center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data for all patients who underwent LSG to treat obesity at our institution from January 2010 to September 2016. All practitioners had undergone training with a single senior bariatric surgeon using oversewing as staple line reinforcement (SLR).

RESULTS

In total, 1023 LSGs were performed (female, 67.3%; mean age, 40.6 ± 10.8 years; median preoperative body mass index, 37 ± 4.5 kg/m²). The mean operative time was 67.6 ± 23.4 min (range, 30-150 min). The rate of conversion to open surgery was 0.3%. Early complications were noted in 18 patients (1.8%), including 5 cases of bleeding (0.5%). No leaks, stenosis, or mortality occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

LSG is a safe technique, but staple line-associated complications can be life-threatening. In this series, no leaks occurred from the very beginning of the surgeons' experience in LSG. Imbricated oversewing of the staple line, proper mentoring, and performance of surgery in appropriate settings are good approaches to decreasing complications.

Postoperative Bleeding and Leakage After Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy is being performed increasingly, mainly due to its low morbidity and mortality, but complications do occur. The aim of this study was to evaluate bleeding and leakage rates of primary and revisional sleeve gastrectomy in a personal series of 664 consecutive patients.

METHODS

Medical charts of all patients undergoing a primary or revisional sleeve gastrectomy between August 2008 and December 2014 were reviewed retrospectively. Subgroup analysis compared bleeding in patients after reduced port versus multiport technique and primary versus revisional sleeve gastrectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 664 sleeve gastrectomies (489 women and 175 men) were performed. Mean age and body mass index were 36.03 ± 11.4 years and 42.9 ± 8.3 kg/m², respectively. Mean operative time was 58.5 ± 20.0 min, with a 0.15 % conversion rate. Mean hospital stay was 2.1 ± 0.3 days. The overall 30-day complication rate was 7.5 %. Thirteen patients sustained postoperative bleeding (2 %), three of whom required reoperation (0.5 %). Staple line leakage and mortality were both nil in this series. No difference in postoperative complications was found between the subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this single-surgeon, single-center experience, sleeve gastrectomy was a safe and effective bariatric procedure with a low complication rate. Staple line reinforcement by oversewing was associated with low bleeding complications and no leakage. The majority of patients with postoperative bleeding could be managed conservatively. In our experience, reduced port technique and revisional sleeve gastrectomy had similar complication rates compared to multiport and primary sleeve gastrectomy.

Comparative use of different techniques for leak and bleeding prevention during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is an approved primary procedure for morbid obesity, but it is associated with serious complications, such as staple line leaks and bleeding. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of staple line reinforcement (SLR) in reducing leaks and bleeding after LSG.

METHODS

A total of 1162 patients underwent LSG (305 males, 857 females). The mean age was 43.7 years and the mean body mass index was 48 kg/m(2). The patients were divided into 6 groups based on the type of SLR, including a no-SLR control group, with evaluation of leaking and bleeding risk and correlation of patients' characteristics with complications.

RESULTS

A total of 189 patients underwent LSG without reinforcement. The SLR method was oversewing in 476 patients, bovine pericardium in 312, synthetic polyester in 76, glycolide/trimethylene copolymer in 63, and thrombin matrix in 46. The overall leak frequency was 2.8%; higher with synthetic polyester (7.8%), 4.8% with no reinforcement, and lower with bovine pericardium strips (.3%; P<.01). Postoperative hemorrhage occurred in 35 patients (3%), with a higher frequency being observed without SLR (13.7%; P = .02). Only diabetes was a risk-factor for a leak (P< .01).

CONCLUSION

SLR with bovine pericardium strips significantly reduced the leak risk. Postoperative bleeding was significantly lower with all SLR-methods, although there was no significant difference among the various techniques. Patients with type II diabetes had a higher risk of staple line leak after LSG. Further randomized, controlled studies are needed to improve our understanding of the efficacy of SLR during LSG.