We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Handsewn vs. stapled anastomoses in colon and rectal surgery: a meta-analysis.
Diseases of the Colon and Rectum 1998 Februrary
PURPOSE: Trials comparing handsewn with stapled anastomoses in colon and rectal surgery have not found statistical differences. Despite this, authors have differed in their conclusions as to which technique is superior. To help determine whether differences in patient outcomes are present, a meta-analysis of all trials was performed.
METHOD: A meta-analysis of all randomized, controlled trials assessing handsewn and stapled colon and rectal anastomoses was done using a fixed-effects model. Outcome variables were mortality, technical problems, leak rates, wound infections, strictures, and cancer recurrence. Outcomes were assessed for all anastomoses involving the colon and for the subset of colorectal anastomoses.
RESULTS: Thirteen distinct trials met the inclusion criteria. Intraoperative technical problems were more likely to occur with stapled than with handsewn anastomoses for all anastomoses (P < 0.0001) and for colorectal anastomoses (P < 0.001). Strictures were also more common following stapled anastomoses (P = 0.015 for all anastomoses; P = 0.028 for colorectal anastomoses). All other outcome measures, including mortality, clinical and radiologic leak rates, and local cancer recurrence rates showed no difference between groups.
CONCLUSION: Although intraoperative technical problems and postoperative strictures were more common with stapled anastomoses, other outcome measures showed no difference between groups. Thus, both techniques are effective, and the choice may be based on personal preference.
METHOD: A meta-analysis of all randomized, controlled trials assessing handsewn and stapled colon and rectal anastomoses was done using a fixed-effects model. Outcome variables were mortality, technical problems, leak rates, wound infections, strictures, and cancer recurrence. Outcomes were assessed for all anastomoses involving the colon and for the subset of colorectal anastomoses.
RESULTS: Thirteen distinct trials met the inclusion criteria. Intraoperative technical problems were more likely to occur with stapled than with handsewn anastomoses for all anastomoses (P < 0.0001) and for colorectal anastomoses (P < 0.001). Strictures were also more common following stapled anastomoses (P = 0.015 for all anastomoses; P = 0.028 for colorectal anastomoses). All other outcome measures, including mortality, clinical and radiologic leak rates, and local cancer recurrence rates showed no difference between groups.
CONCLUSION: Although intraoperative technical problems and postoperative strictures were more common with stapled anastomoses, other outcome measures showed no difference between groups. Thus, both techniques are effective, and the choice may be based on personal preference.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app