Intracorporeal or Extracorporeal Ileocolic Anastomosis After Laparoscopic Right Colectomy: A Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.


Journal

Annals of surgery
ISSN: 1528-1140
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372354

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 9 10 2019
medline: 17 3 2020
entrez: 9 10 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The aim of the study was to determine whether there are clinically relevant differences in outcomes between laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) with intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis (IIA) and LRC with extracorporeal IA (EIA). IIA and EIA are 2 well-established techniques for restoration of bowel continuity after LRC. There are no high-quality studies demonstrating the superiority of one anastomotic technique over the other. This is a double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing the outcomes of LRC with IIA and LRC with EIA in patients with a benign or malignant right-sided colon neoplasm. Primary endpoint was length of hospital stay (LOS). This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03045107. A total of 140 patients were randomized and analyzed. Median operative time was comparable in IIA versus EIA group {130 [interquartile range (IQR) 105-195] vs 130 (IQR 110-180) min; P = 0.770} and no intraoperative complications occurred. The quicker recovery of bowel function after IIA than EIA [gas: 2 (IQR 2-3) vs 3 (IQR 2-3) days, P = 0.003; stool: 4 (IQR 3-5) vs 4.5 (IQR 3-5) days, P = 0.032] was not reflected in any advantage in the primary endpoint: median LOS was similar in the 2 groups [6 (IQR 5-7) vs 6 (IQR 5-8) days; P = 0.839]. No significant differences were observed in the number of lymph nodes harvested, length of skin incision, 30-day morbidity (17.1% vs 15.7%, P = 0.823), reoperation rate, and readmission rate between the 2 groups. LRC with IIA is associated with earlier recovery of postoperative bowel function than LRC with EIA; however, it does not reflect into a shorter LOS.

Sections du résumé

OBJECTIVES
The aim of the study was to determine whether there are clinically relevant differences in outcomes between laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) with intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis (IIA) and LRC with extracorporeal IA (EIA).
BACKGROUND
IIA and EIA are 2 well-established techniques for restoration of bowel continuity after LRC. There are no high-quality studies demonstrating the superiority of one anastomotic technique over the other.
METHODS
This is a double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing the outcomes of LRC with IIA and LRC with EIA in patients with a benign or malignant right-sided colon neoplasm. Primary endpoint was length of hospital stay (LOS). This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03045107.
RESULTS
A total of 140 patients were randomized and analyzed. Median operative time was comparable in IIA versus EIA group {130 [interquartile range (IQR) 105-195] vs 130 (IQR 110-180) min; P = 0.770} and no intraoperative complications occurred. The quicker recovery of bowel function after IIA than EIA [gas: 2 (IQR 2-3) vs 3 (IQR 2-3) days, P = 0.003; stool: 4 (IQR 3-5) vs 4.5 (IQR 3-5) days, P = 0.032] was not reflected in any advantage in the primary endpoint: median LOS was similar in the 2 groups [6 (IQR 5-7) vs 6 (IQR 5-8) days; P = 0.839]. No significant differences were observed in the number of lymph nodes harvested, length of skin incision, 30-day morbidity (17.1% vs 15.7%, P = 0.823), reoperation rate, and readmission rate between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS
LRC with IIA is associated with earlier recovery of postoperative bowel function than LRC with EIA; however, it does not reflect into a shorter LOS.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31592811
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003519
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03045107']

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

762-767

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn

Auteurs

Marco E Allaix (ME)

Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.

Maurizio Degiuli (M)

Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.

Marco A Bonino (MA)

Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.

Alberto Arezzo (A)

Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.

Massimiliano Mistrangelo (M)

Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.

Roberto Passera (R)

Division of Nuclear Medicine, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.

Mario Morino (M)

Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH