The comparison of anastomosis strength and leakage between double-layer full-thickness and single-layer extramucosal intestine anastomosis.
all layer
end-to-end
experimental study
seromuscular
surgical anastomosis
Journal
Annals of medicine and surgery (2012)
ISSN: 2049-0801
Titre abrégé: Ann Med Surg (Lond)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101616869
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2023
Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
07
12
2022
accepted:
02
07
2023
medline:
9
8
2023
pubmed:
9
8
2023
entrez:
9
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Various intestine anastomosis techniques have been studied and used, but which is best is still debated. In our center, double-layer full-thickness intestine anastomosis was still considered as standard. However, a single-layer extramucosal intestine anastomosis has shown favorable results. This study created an anastomotic model to compare the anastomosis strength and leakage between double-layer full-thickness and single-layer extramucosal intestine anastomosis. This experimental study was performed in 20 randomized healthy male pigs, to be included either in Group A (Single-layer extramucosal intestine anastomosis) or Group B (Double-layer full-thickness intestine anastomosis). Enterotomy followed by an end-to-end anastomosis suture was performed in the jejunum. Fourteen days after the operation, any anastomosis leakage and its location was documented. The anastomosis strength was evaluated using manometry. Data were compared between groups using the Mann-Whitney The overall mean intraluminal anastomotic bursting pressure was 4,257±1,185. Group A had a higher intraluminal anastomotic bursting pressure but was not statistically significant compared to group B (4.726±0.952 vs. 3.787±1.252 kilopascals, The anastomosis strength and leakage did not differ significantly between the single-layer extramucosal intestine anastomosis group and the double-layer full-thickness anastomosis group. However, the location of leakage was most common in the antimesenteric area in the double-layer full-thickness anastomosis group.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37554861
doi: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000001072
pii: AMSU-D-22-02944
pmc: PMC10406036
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
3912-3915Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that they have no financial conflict of interest with regard to the content of this report.
Références
Br J Surg. 2015 Jun;102(7):726-34
pubmed: 25846745
Front Surg. 2020 Nov 11;7:587951
pubmed: 33263000
PLoS Biol. 2010 Jun 29;8(6):e1000412
pubmed: 20613859
Scand J Surg. 2012;101(4):238-40
pubmed: 23238497
Anticancer Res. 2020 Apr;40(4):1891-1896
pubmed: 32234877
Wound Manag Prev. 2021 Mar;67(3):21-28
pubmed: 33788772
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2022 May 04;18:523-539
pubmed: 35548666
Am Surg. 1965 Jan;31:17-20
pubmed: 14227204