Journal
LANGENBECKS ARCHIVES OF SURGERY
Volume 408, Issue 1, Pages -Publisher
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03058-1
Keywords
Rectal cancer; Anastomotic leak; Reinforcing suture; Meta-analysis
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This study investigated the safety and effectiveness of reinforced sutures for preventing anastomotic leakage (AL) after rectal cancer surgery. The results showed that the reinforced suture group had a lower AL incidence, lower infection rate, shorter hospital stay, and earlier anal exhaust compared to the unreinforced suture group. However, the operative time was longer for reinforced sutures.
PurposeAnastomotic leakage (AL) is a common postoperative complication of rectal cancer, with an incidence of about 10%, and the efficacy of reinforced sutures for preventing AL remains contentious. This study investigated the safety and effectiveness of reinforcement sutures for preventing AL after rectal cancer surgery.MethodsThe present authors conducted a systematic search in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Sinomed, Web of Science, Wanfang, VIP, and CNKI databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies up to June 2023. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of anastomotic reinforcement sutures after rectal cancer surgery. The primary outcome measures were AL, anastomotic bleeding, and infection rates.ResultsEleven articles (1921 subjects) were analyzed, with 912 and 1009 cases in the reinforced and unreinforced suture groups, respectively. The reinforced suture group showed a lower AL incidence (odds ratio [OR]=0.25, 95% CI 0.17-0.37, P< 0.00001), lower infection rate (OR=0.41, 95%CI 0.19-0.89, P<0.05), shorter hospital stay (mean difference [MD]=-0.57, 95%CI -1.15-0.00, P & LE;0.05), and earlier anal exhaust (MD=-0.12, 95%CI -0.23-0.00, P<0.05). However, the operative time (MD=18.25, 95% CI 12.20-24.30, P<0.00001) was longer for reinforced sutures than for unreinforced sutures. There were no significant differences between the suture techniques in intraoperative blood loss MD=2.74, 95% CI -4.50-9.97, P>0.05), incidence of anastomotic bleeding (OR=0.49, 95%CI 0.12-1.97, P>0.05), and incidence of intestinal obstruction (OR=0.65, 95%CI 0.27-1.61, P>0.05).ConclusionExisting articles indicate that anastomotic reinforcement sutures can significantly reduce AL incidence. However, this conclusion still requires confirmation based on multicentre, high-quality RCTs with large sample sizes.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available