4.4 Review

Clinical efficacy of anastomotic reinforcement suture in preventing anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

LANGENBECKS ARCHIVES OF SURGERY
卷 408, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03058-1

关键词

Rectal cancer; Anastomotic leak; Reinforcing suture; Meta-analysis

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据