Advertisement

Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

, Volume 38, Issue 10, pp 1026–1032 | Cite as

Proliferative activity at rectal anastomoses performed with various suture materials

An experimental study
  • Shlomo Kyzer
  • Philip H. Gordon
Original Contributions
  • 10 Downloads

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Suture line recurrence continues to be an important cause of failure following curative resection for colorectal carcinoma. Our aim was to determine whether the nature of the suture material used affected the proliferative activity of colonic crypt cells at the anastomosis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sprague-Dawley rats were randomized into one control and three experimental groups. In each experimental group the proximal 2 cm of rectum were resected and anastomoses constructed with titanium clips, interrupted 6-0 VicrylTM (Ethicon, Inc., Somerville, NJ), and interrupted 6-0 silk. Control animals had a sham operation. One-quarter of each group of rats were killed at 14, 30, 60, and 90 days. Each animal received intraperitoneal tritiated thymidine 30 minutes before death. Each anastomosis was harvested, and longitudinally oriented crypts were analyzed for the total number and position of labeled cells at five equal distances from the anastomosis. Random crypts were studied in the control group. RESULTS: Labeling indices were increased in almost all experimental groups at days 14, 30, 60, and 90. There were no persistent, statistically significant differences in labeling indices among the various suture materials. CONCLUSION: The type of suture material used did not significantly affect the proliferative rate in this animal model.

Key words

Proliferative activity Anastomosis Suture material 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Long RT, Edwards PH. Implantation metastasis as a cause of local recurrence of colorectal carcinoma. Am J Surg 1989;157:194–201.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pihl E, Hughes ES, McDermott FT, Price AB. Recurrence of carcinoma of the colon and rectum at the anastomotic suture line. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1981;153:495–6.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rich T, Gunderson L, Lew R, Galdibini J, Cohen A, Donaldson G. Patterns of recurrence of rectal cancer after potentially curative surgery. Cancer 1983;52:1317–28.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Polk HC, Spratt JS. Recurrent colorectal carcinoma: detection, treatment and other considerations. Surg 1971;69:9–23.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rosenberg IL. The aetiology of colonic suture line recurrence. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1979;61:251–7.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fermor B, Umpleby HC, Lever JV, Williamson RC. Proliferative and metastatic potential of exfoliated colorectal cancer cells. J Natl Cancer Inst 1986;76:347–9.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schackert HK, Fidler IJ. Development of an animal model to study the biology of recurrent colorectal cancer originating from mesenteric lymph system metastases. Int J Cancer 1989;44:177–81.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall R. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery: the clue to pelvic recurrences. Br J Surg 1982;69:613–6.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    O'Dwyer P, Ravikumar TS, Steele JR. Serum dependent variability in the adherence of tumor cells to surgical sutures. Br J Surg 1985;72:466–9.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    McGregor JR, Galloway DJ, Jarrett F, Brown IL, George WD. Anastomotic suture materials and experimental colorectal carcinogenesis. Dis Colon Rectum 1991;34:987–92.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cohn I Jr, Corley RG, Floyd CE. Iodized suture for control of tumor implantation in a colon anastomosis. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1963;116:366–370.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Deschner EE, Lipkin M. Proliferative patterns in colonic mucosa in familial polyposis. Cancer 1975;35:413–8.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lipkin M, Blattner WE, Fraumeni JF, Lynch HT, Deschner EE, Winawer S. Tritiated thymidine (OpOh) labelling distribution as a marker for hereditary predisposition to colon cancer. Cancer Res 1983;43:1899–904.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Terpstra OT, Peterson Dahl E, Williamson RC, Ross JS, Malt RA. Colostomy closure promotes cell proliferation and dimethylhydrazine-induced carcino-genesis in rat distal colon. Gastroenterology 1981;81:475–80.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Williamson RC, Bauer FL, Ross JS, Watkins JB, Malt RA. Enhanced colonic carcinogenesis with azoxymethane in rats after pancreaticobiliary diversion to mid-small bowel. Gastroenterology 1979;76:1386–92.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shields HM. Occurrence of an adenocarcinoma at the choledochoenteric anastomosis 14 years after pancreatoduodenectomy for benign disease. Gastroenterology 1977;72:322–4.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sooriyaarachihi GS, Johnson RO, Carbone PP. Neoplasms of the large bowel following ureterosigmoidostomy. Arch Surg 1977;112:1174–7.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roe R, Fermor B, Williamson RC. Proliferative instability and experimental carcinogenesis at colonic anastomosis. Gut 1987;28:808–15.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Williamson RC, Davies PW, Bristol JB, Wells M. Intestinal adaptation and experimental carcinogenesis after partial colectomy: increased tumor yields are confined to the anastomosis. Gut 1982;23:316–25.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Aldewachi HS, Wright NA, Appleton DR, Waston AJ. The cell cycle time in the rat jejunal mucosa. Cell Tissue Kinet 1974;7:587–94.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Umpleby HC, Williamson RC. Anastomotic recurrence in large bowel cancer. Br J Surg 1987;74:873–8.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pozharisski KM. The significance of non-specific injury for colon carcinogenesis in rats. Cancer Res 1975;35:3824–30.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Phillips RK, Cook HT. Effect of steel wire sutures on the incidence of chemically induced rodent colonic tumours. Br J Surg 1986;73:671–4.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Buhr HJ, Hipp T, Beck N. Gastrointestinal tumours after stapler vs. vicryl anastomosis in carcinogen treated rats. Eur J Surg Oncol 1990;16:493–6.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Byrne PJ, Stephens RB, Hennessy TP, West AB, Sheaham DG. Colon cancer at site of anastomosis. Lancet 1984;1:225.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Colderisi RN, Freeman HJ. Differential effect of surgical suture materials in 1-2-dimethylhydrazine induced rat intestinal neoplasia. Cancer Res 1984;44:2824–30.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    McCue JL, Phillips RK. Cellular proliferation at sutured and sutureless colonic anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum 1993;36:468–74.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    O'Donnell AF, O'Connell PR, Royston D, Johnston DH, Barnard R, Bouchier-Hayes D. Suture technique affects perianastomotic colonic crypt cell production and tumour formation. Br J Surg 1991;78:671–4.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shlomo Kyzer
    • 1
  • Philip H. Gordon
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgerySir Mortimer B. Davis-Jewish General Hospital, McGill UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations