Advertisement

Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 32, Issue 8, pp 3667–3674 | Cite as

Feasibility of a novel laparoscopic technique with unidirectional knotless barbed sutures for the primary closure of duodenal ulcer perforation

  • Tae-Han Kim
  • Ji-Ho Park
  • Sang-Ho Jeong
  • Jin-Kwon Lee
  • Seung-Jin Kwag
  • Ju-Yeon Kim
  • Woohyung Lee
  • Jung-Woo Woo
  • Jae Yool Jang
  • Eun-Jin Song
  • Taejin Park
  • Chi-Young Jeong
  • Young-Tae Ju
  • Eun-Jung Jung
  • Soon-Chan Hong
  • Sang-Kyung Choi
  • Woo-Song Ha
  • Young-Joon Lee
Article
  • 433 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic primary repair is one of the main procedures used for perforated gastric ulcers, and this technique requires reproducible and secure suturing. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of a novel continuous suture method with barbed sutures during laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcers.

Patients and methods

Clinical data from 116 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcers were collected between November 2009 and October 2015. Continuous suturing with 15-cm-long unidirectional absorbable barbed sutures was used for laparoscopic repair in the study group, termed group V (n = 51). Patients who underwent laparoscopic repair with conventional interrupted sutures were defined as group C (n = 65). The complication and operative data were compared between groups.

Results

Although there was no difference between group V and group C in the overall complication rate (15.7% vs. 24.6%; p = 0.259), the complication rate related to suturing was lower (3.9% vs. 15.4%; p = 0.04) in group V. Group V showed rates of 0% for leakage, 2% for intra-abdominal fluid collection, and 2% for stricture; the corresponding rates in group C were 3.1, 7.7, and 4.6%, respectively. Regarding operative data, the total operation time (V vs. C, 87.7 min vs. 131.2 min), total suture time (7.1 min vs. 25.3 min), and suture time per stitch (1.2 min vs. 6.2 min) were significantly shorter in group V than in group C (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The use of a continuous suture technique with unidirectional barbed sutures is as safe as the conventional suture technique and allows easier and faster suturing in the repair of perforated peptic ulcers.

Keywords

Peptic ulcer Barbed suture Perforation 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosures

Tae-Han Kim, Ji-Ho Park, Sang-Ho Jeong, Jin-Kwon Lee, Seung-Jin Kwag, Ju-Yeon Kim, Woohyung Lee, Jung-Woo Woo, Jae Yool Jang, Eun-Jin Song, Taejin Park, Chi-Young Jeong, Young-Tae Ju, Eun-Jung Jung, Soon-Chan Hong, Sang-Kyung Choi, Woo-Song Ha, and Young-Joon Lee have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

References

  1. 1.
    Wang YR, Richter JE, Dempsey DT (2010) Trends and outcomes of hospitalizations for peptic ulcer disease in the United States, 1993 to 2006. Ann Surg 251:51–58CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Siu WT, Leong HT, Law BK, Chau CH, Li AC, Fung KH, Tai YP, Li MK (2002) Laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 235:313–319CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lau JY, Sung J, Hill C, Henderson C, Howden CW, Metz DC (2011) Systematic review of the epidemiology of complicated peptic ulcer disease: incidence, recurrence, risk factors and mortality. Digestion 84:102–113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Verdaasdonk EG, Stassen LP, Widhiasmara PP, Dankelman J (2009) Requirements for the design and implementation of checklists for surgical processes. Surg Endosc 23:715–726CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Navez B, Navez J (2014) Laparoscopy in the acute abdomen. Best practice research. Clin Gastroenterol 28:3–17Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sanabria A, Villegas MI, Morales Uribe CH (2013) Laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD004778Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nemecek E, Negrin L, Beran C, Nemecek R, Hollinsky C (2013) The application of the V-Loc closure device for gastrointestinal sutures: a preliminary study. Surg Endosc 27:3830–3834CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bush CM, Prosser JD, Morrison MP, Sandhu G, Wenger KH, Pashley DH, Birchall MA, Postma GN, Weinberger PM (2012) New technology applications: knotless barbed suture for tracheal resection anastomosis. Laryngoscope 122:1062–1066CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Girard M, Coulot M (1956) First results of laparoscopic examinations in hepato-vesicular pathology. Lyon Med 88:433–438PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rosenberg N (1955) Submucosal saline wheal as safety factor in fulguration or rectal and sigmoidal polypi. AMA Arch Surg 70:120–122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Litynski GS (1999) Profiles in laparoscopy: Mouret, Dubois, and Perissat: the laparoscopic breakthrough in Europe (1987–1988). JSLS J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 3:163–167Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ritter EM, McClusky DA 3rd, Gallagher AG, Smith CD (2005) Real-time objective assessment of knot quality with a portable tensiometer is superior to execution time for assessment of laparoscopic knot-tying performance. Surg Innov 12:233–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Demyttenaere SV, Nau P, Henn M, Beck C, Zaruby J, Primavera M, Kirsch D, Miller J, Liu JJ, Bellizzi A, Melvin WS (2009) Barbed suture for gastrointestinal closure: a randomized control trial. Surg Innov 16:237–242CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tyner RP, Clifton GT, Fenton SJ (2013) Hand-sewn gastrojejunostomy using knotless unidirectional barbed absorbable suture during laparoscopic gastric bypass. Surg Endosc 27:1360–1366CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    De Blasi V, Facy O, Goergen M, Poulain V, De Magistris L, Azagra JS (2013) Barbed versus usual suture for closure of the gastrojejunal anastomosis in laparoscopic gastric bypass: a comparative trial. Obes Surg 23:60–63CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee JS, Yoon YC (2017) Laparoscopic treatment of choledochal cyst using barbed sutures. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 27:58–62CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jang SH, Jung YK, Choi SJ, Ha TK (2017) Postoperative mechanical small bowel obstruction induced by V-Loc barbed absorbable suture after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Ann Surg Treat Res 92:380–382CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sakata S, Kabir S, Petersen D, Doudle M, Stevenson AR (2015) Are we burying our heads in the sand? Preventing small bowel obstruction from the V-loc(R) suture in laparoscopic ventral rectopexy. Colorectal Dis 17::O180-183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Haga N, Kurita N, Yanagida T, Ogawa S, Yabe M, Akaihata H, Hata J, Sato Y, Ishibashi K, Hasegawa O, Kojima Y (2017) Effects of barbed suture during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy on postoperative tissue damage and longitudinal changes in lower urinary tract outcome. Surg Endosc.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5649-z
  21. 21.
    Sarin S, Lightwood RG (1989) Continuous single-layer gastrointestinal anastomosis: a prospective audit. Br J Surg 76:493–495CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Richards PC, Balch CM, Aldrete JS (1983) Abdominal wound closure. A randomized prospective study of 571 patients comparing continuous vs. interrupted suture techniques. Ann Surg 197:238–243CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bloechle C, Emmermann A, Strate T, Scheurlen UJ, Schneider C, Achilles E, Wolf M, Mack D, Zornig C, Broelsch CE (1998) Laparoscopic vs open repair of gastric perforation and abdominal lavage of associated peritonitis in pigs. Surg Endosc 12:212–218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sivaram P, Sreekumar A (2017) Preoperative factors influencing mortality and morbidity in peptic ulcer perforation. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-017-0777-7 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Guadagni S, Cengeli I, Galatioto C, Furbetta N, Piero VL, Zocco G, Seccia M (2014) Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer: single-center results. Surg Endosc 28:2302–2308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tae-Han Kim
    • 1
  • Ji-Ho Park
    • 1
  • Sang-Ho Jeong
    • 1
  • Jin-Kwon Lee
    • 1
  • Seung-Jin Kwag
    • 1
  • Ju-Yeon Kim
    • 1
  • Woohyung Lee
    • 1
  • Jung-Woo Woo
    • 1
  • Jae Yool Jang
    • 1
  • Eun-Jin Song
    • 1
  • Taejin Park
    • 1
  • Chi-Young Jeong
    • 1
  • Young-Tae Ju
    • 1
  • Eun-Jung Jung
    • 1
  • Soon-Chan Hong
    • 1
  • Sang-Kyung Choi
    • 1
  • Woo-Song Ha
    • 1
  • Young-Joon Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University HospitalGyeongsang National University Postgraduate School of MedicineJinjuRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations