The effect of suture techniques on the outcome of tracheal reconstruction: An observational study and review of literature.
Reconstructive surgical procedures
Sutures
Tracheal stenosis
Journal
The surgeon : journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland
ISSN: 1479-666X
Titre abrégé: Surgeon
Pays: Scotland
ID NLM: 101168329
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2023
Apr 2023
Historique:
received:
07
11
2021
revised:
23
03
2022
accepted:
31
03
2022
pubmed:
4
5
2022
medline:
15
3
2023
entrez:
3
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Tracheal resection and anastomosis surgery is a safe operation and is used to treat various benign and malignant diseases of the trachea. However, tracheal stenosis is among the main anastomotic complications following this procedure. Surgeons use both the continuous and the interrupted suture techniques for tracheal anastomosis, but contradicting results in each technique's complications have been reported in various studies. In this study, we aimed to compare the outcome of these two different suture techniques and a relevant literature review. Surgical records during a period of 15 years (2005-2019) were screened for tracheal reconstruction surgery in affiliated hospitals of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. A total of 82 patients were evaluated based on surgical and suture features, along with their follow-up bronchoscopy for anastomotic complications. Post-operational subclinical restenosis occurred in 8 (15.3%) out of 52 and 10 (33.3%) of 30 patients who underwent continuous and interrupted suturing techniques, respectively. Also, 6 (20%) patients in the interrupted group developed symptomatic restenosis, while in the continuous group, only one patient was clinically symptomatic. The patients with continuous suture technique had a shorter surgery time than patients whose interrupted technique was used (P < 0.001). Based on our results, we conclude that restenosis is significantly reduced when the continuous technique is applied for tracheal anastomosis; However, the results are contradicting in relevant literature and due to the retrospective nature of our study, further human studies and clinical trials are warranted.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Tracheal resection and anastomosis surgery is a safe operation and is used to treat various benign and malignant diseases of the trachea. However, tracheal stenosis is among the main anastomotic complications following this procedure. Surgeons use both the continuous and the interrupted suture techniques for tracheal anastomosis, but contradicting results in each technique's complications have been reported in various studies. In this study, we aimed to compare the outcome of these two different suture techniques and a relevant literature review.
METHODS
METHODS
Surgical records during a period of 15 years (2005-2019) were screened for tracheal reconstruction surgery in affiliated hospitals of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. A total of 82 patients were evaluated based on surgical and suture features, along with their follow-up bronchoscopy for anastomotic complications.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Post-operational subclinical restenosis occurred in 8 (15.3%) out of 52 and 10 (33.3%) of 30 patients who underwent continuous and interrupted suturing techniques, respectively. Also, 6 (20%) patients in the interrupted group developed symptomatic restenosis, while in the continuous group, only one patient was clinically symptomatic. The patients with continuous suture technique had a shorter surgery time than patients whose interrupted technique was used (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Based on our results, we conclude that restenosis is significantly reduced when the continuous technique is applied for tracheal anastomosis; However, the results are contradicting in relevant literature and due to the retrospective nature of our study, further human studies and clinical trials are warranted.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35504817
pii: S1479-666X(22)00058-0
doi: 10.1016/j.surge.2022.03.008
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Review
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e89-e96Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh (Scottish charity number SC005317) and Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests.