Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Low colorectal anastomoses

An experimental assessment of two sutured and two stapled techniques

  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

Extraperitoneal colorectal anastomoses were constructed in dogs by four methods: one layer of sutures (N=10), two layers of sutures (N=10), EEA staples (N=10), and SPTU staples (N=10). Dehiscence occurred in eight sutured and one stapled anastomosis (P<0.05). The four leaks following two layer sutured anastomoses caused three deaths, whereas all four leaks following one-layer sutured anastomoses were only detected radiologically (P<0.02). In the stapled group, the single leak followed EEA anastomosis and was fatal. Anastomotic narrowing was greater in sutured than stapled groups (P<0.05). Two layers of sutures produced gross narrowing compared with one layer (P<0.002). Two rows of staples (EEA) produced more narrowing than one row (SPTU) (P<0.01). Mean hydroxyproline concentrations and bursting pressures on the seventh postoperative day were higher in stapled than sutured anastomoses (P<0.05). Submucosal alignment, mucosal continuity, tissue viability, and stage of healing were all inferior for two-layer sutured anastomoses, reaching statistical significance for tissue viability (P<0.05). Stapled anastomoses were completed significantly faster (32.6±7.3 minutes) than sutured (54.1±8.4 minutes) (P<0.01). This experimental study has demonstrated that stapling is a fast and reliable method of colorectal anastomosis with a low complication rate. The shortcomings of the standard two-layer sutured anastomosis are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fielding LP, Stewart-Brown S, Blesovsky L, et al. Anastomotic integrity after operation for large bowel cancer: a multicentre study. Br Med J 1980;281:411–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Goligher JC, Morris C, McAdam WA, et al.. A controlled trial of inverting versus everting intestinal suture in clinical large bowel surgery. Br J Surg 1970;57:817–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Everett WG. A comparison of one layer and two layer techniques for colorectal anastomosis. Br J Surg 1975;62:135–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Woessner JF Jr. Determination of hydroxyproline in tissue and protein samples containing small proportions of the amino acid. Arch Biochem Biophys 1961;93:440–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Goligher JC, Lee PW, Macfie J, Simpkins KC, Lintott DJ. Experience with the Russian model 249 suture gun for anastomosis of the rectum. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1979;148:517–24.

    Google Scholar 

  6. McAdam AJ, Meikle AG, Taylor JO. One layer or two layer colonic anastomoses. Am J Surg 1970;120:546–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Andalkar RR. Comparative study, of stapled versus sutured anastomosis in low anterior resection. J Maine Med Assoc 1979;70:429–31.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bubrick MP, Lundeen JW, Hitchcock CR. A comparative radiographic study of low anterior colon anastomoses in dogs. Surgery 1981;89:454–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Overy RD, Godfrey PJ, Evans M, et al. Staples or sutures in the colon? A random controlled trial of three methods of colonic anastomosis. Br J Surg 1980;67:363–4.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Beart RW, Kelly KA. Randomized prospective evaluation of the EEA stapler for colorectal anastomoses. Am J Surg 1981;141:143–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Matheson NA, Irving AD. Single layer anastomosis after rectosigmoid resection. Br J Surg 1975;62:239–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Orr NWM. A single layer intestinal anastomosis. Br J Surg 1969; 56:771–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Smith LE. Anastomosis with EEA stapler after anterior colonic resection (symposium). Dis Colon Rectum 1981;24:236–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Blamey SL, Lee PW. A comparison of circular stapling devices for colorectal anastomoses. Br J Surg 1982;69:19–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Keane FB, Moore DJ, Byrne PJ, Hennessy TP. A comparison of circular stapling devices for rectal anastomoses: a study in dogs. Dis Colon Rectum 1982;25:285–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

About this article

Cite this article

Templeton, J.L., McKelvey, S.T.D. Low colorectal anastomoses. Dis Colon Rectum 28, 38–41 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02553905

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02553905

Key words

Navigation