Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 27, Issue 10, pp 3841–3845 | Cite as

Laparoscopic gastrointestinal anastomoses using knotless barbed sutures are safe and reproducible: a single-center experience with 201 patients

  • Olivier Facy
  • Vito De Blasi
  • Martine Goergen
  • Luca Arru
  • Luigi De Magistris
  • Juan-Santiago Azagra



Intestinal anastomosis is a complex procedure during laparoscopy, mainly due to the difficulties knotting the sutures. Unidirectional barbed sutures have been proposed to simplify wall and mesentery closure, but the results for intestinal anastomosis are not clear. This study aimed to establish the feasibility and the safety of laparoscopic intestinal anastomosis using barbed suture.


Between June 2011 and May 2012, 15-cm-long unidirectional absorbable barbed sutures (V-Loc; Covidien, Mansfield, MA, USA) were used for all laparoscopic intestinal anastomoses: one suture for closure of intestinal openings after mechanical anastomoses and two sutures for hand-sewn anastomoses.


Over a 1-year period, 201 consecutive patients required 220 laparoscopic anastomoses for gastrojejunostomy (n = 177; 172 during Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and 5 after gastrectomy), ileocolostomy (n = 15), colocolostomy (n = 1), esophagojejunostomy (n = 5), and jejunojejunostomy (n = 22; 4 after small bowel resection and 18 during gastric bypass or gastrectomy). Senior and training surgeons performed 209 closures of intestinal openings and 11 hand-sewn anastomoses. There was no conversion to usual sutures. One fistula occurred in an esophagojejunostomy and was managed conservatively. One self-limited anastomotic bleeding occurred, and no anastomotic stenosis occurred during 6 months of follow-up evaluation.


The use of knotless barbed suture for laparoscopic intestinal anastomosis is safe and reproducible.


Barbed suture Intestinal anastomosis Laparoscopy 



Olivier Facy, Vito De Blasi, Martine Goergen, Luca Arru, Luigi De Magistris, and Juan-Santiago Azagra have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.


  1. 1.
    Alves A, Panis Y, Mathieu P et al (2005) Postoperative mortality and morbidity in French patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Arch Surg 140:278–283PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee SW, Nomura E, Tokuhara T et al (2011) Laparoscopic technique and initial experience with knotless, unidirectional barbed suture closure for staple-conserving, delta-shaped gastroduodenostomy after distal gastrectomy. J Am Coll Surg 213:39–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tyner RP, Clifton GT, Fenton SJ (2012) Hand-sewn gastrojejunostomy using knotless unidirectional barbed absorbable suture during laparoscopic gastric bypass. Surg Endosc 27(4):1360–1366PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Blasi V, Facy O, Goergen M et al (2013) Barbed versus usual suture for closure of the gastrojejunal anastomosis in laparoscopic gastric bypass: a comparative trial. Obes Surg 23:60–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jarry J, Wagner T, de Pommerol M et al (2012) Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: comparison between hand-sewn and mechanical gastrojejunostomy. Updates Surg 64:25–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ruiz de Adana JC, Hernández Matías A, Hernández Bartolomé M et al (2009) Risk of gastrojejunal anastomotic stricture with multifilament and monofilament sutures after hand-sewn laparoscopic gastric bypass: a prospective cohort study. Obes Surg 19:1274–1277PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sierzega M, Kolodziejczyk P, Kulig J, Polish Gastric Cancer Study Group (2010) Impact of anastomotic leakage on long-term survival after total gastrectomy for carcinoma of the stomach. Br J Surg 97:1035–1042PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ukleja A, Afonso BB, Pimentel R et al (2008) Outcome of endoscopic balloon dilation of strictures after laparoscopic gastric bypass. Surg Endosc 22:1746–1750PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schwartz ML, Drew RL, Roiger RW et al (2004) Stenosis of the gastroenterostomy after laparoscopic gastric bypass. Obes Surg 14:484–491PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Frutos MD, Luján J, García A et al (2009) Gastrojejunal anastomotic stenosis in laparoscopic gastric bypass with a circular stapler (21 mm): incidence, treatment, and long-term follow-up. Obes Surg 19:1631–1635PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Einarsson JI, Chavan NR, Suzuki Y et al (2011) Use of bidirectional barbed suture in laparoscopic myomectomy: evaluation of perioperative outcomes, safety, and efficacy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 18:92–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Naki MM, Api O, Acioglu HC et al (2010) Comparative study of a barbed suture, poliglecaprone, and stapler in Pfannenstiel incisions performed for benign gynecological procedures: a randomized trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 89:1473–1477PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Siedhoff MT, Yunker AC, Steege JF (2011) Decreased incidence of vaginal cuff dehiscence after laparoscopic closure with bidirectional barbed suture. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 18:218–223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Warner JP, Gutowski KA (2009) Abdominoplasty with progressive tension closure using a barbed suture technique. Aesthet Surg J 29:221–225PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Murtha AP, Kaplan AL, Paglia MJ et al (2006) Evaluation of a novel technique for wound closure using a barbed suture. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:1769–1780PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shikanov S, Wille M, Large M et al (2009) Knotless closure of the collecting system and renal parenchyma with a novel barbed suture during laparoscopic porcine partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 23:1157–1160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gililland JM, Anderson LA, Sun G et al (2012) Perioperative closure-related complication rates and cost analysis of barbed suture for closure in TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:125–129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tewari AK, Srivastava A, Sooriakumaran P et al (2010) Use of a novel absorbable barbed plastic surgical suture enables a “self-cinching” technique of vesicourethral anastomosis during robot-assisted prostatectomy and improves anastomotic times. J Endourol 24:1645–1650PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kaul S, Sammon J, Bhandari A et al (2010) A novel method of urethrovesical anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using a unidirectional barbed wound closure device: feasibility study and early outcomes in 51 patients. J Endourol 24:1789–1793PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Williams SB, Alemozaffar M, Lei Y et al (2010) Randomized controlled trial of barbed polyglyconate versus polyglactin suture for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy anastomosis: technique and outcomes. Eur Urol 58:875–881PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zorn KC, Trinh Q-D, Jeldres C et al (2012) Prospective randomized trial of barbed polyglyconate suture to facilitate vesico-urethral anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: time reduction and cost benefit. BJU Int 109:1526–1532PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Platell C, Barwood N, Dorfmann G et al (2007) The incidence of anastomotic leaks in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis 9:71–79PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lang H, Piso P, Stukenborg C et al (2000) Management and results of proximal anastomotic leaks in a series of 1,114 total gastrectomies for gastric carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 26:168–171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Olivier Facy
    • 1
    • 2
  • Vito De Blasi
    • 1
  • Martine Goergen
    • 1
  • Luca Arru
    • 1
  • Luigi De Magistris
    • 1
  • Juan-Santiago Azagra
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Digestive SurgeryUniversity Hospital of LuxembourgLuxembourgLuxembourg
  2. 2.Unité des Maladies de l’Appareil Digestif et Endocrine (UMADE)Centre Hospitalier de LuxembourgLuxembourg CityLuxembourg

Personalised recommendations