Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Telescoping anastomosis of the colon: A comparative study

  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Summary

The incidence of large-intestinal anastomotic leaks remains unacceptably high. For this reason, we studied the resistance to dehiscence of a telescoping type of anastomosis and compared it with the conventional one-layer, two-layer, and stapled anastomoses in a canine model. These experiments demonstrated that the telescoping anastomosis provided a more resistant suture line during the early postoperative phase and did not cause encroachment of the lumen by the diaphragm, which was consistently produced when an inverting suture line was used. Three days postoperatively the mean bursting pressures of the one-layer, two-layer, and stapled anastomoses were 31±12, 120±46, and 52±21 mm Hg, respectively. The telescoping anastomosis had a mean bursting pressure of 210±44 mm Hg, which was significantly (P<0.01) higher than those of all the other anastomoses tested. However, seven and 14 days after opertion, there was no statistically significant difference among the bursting pressures of the various anastomoses. When the different types of anastomoses were examined histologically, it was found that there was considerably more suture-line inflammation, edema, micro-abscess formation, mucosal ulceration and pericolic inflammation of the fat in the one-layer, two-layer, and stapled anastomoses than in the telescoping anastomosis.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adam YG, Volk H, State D: Low colorectal anastomosis after resection for cancer. Surg Gynecol Obstet 125: 1259, 1967

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Beahrs OH: Low anterior resection for cancer of the rectosigmoid and rectum. Surg Clin North Am 47: 971, 1967

    Google Scholar 

  3. Czerny V: Quoted by Lindenmuth WW, May CJ: Anastomoses in the alimentary tract using a sero-muscular tubular cuff technic. Ann Surg 165: 590, 1967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Da Costa JC, Lipshutz B: Modern Surgery, General and Operative. Ed 10, Philadelphia, W. B. Saunders Company, 1931, p 1031

    Google Scholar 

  5. Debas HT, Thomson FB: A critical review of colectomy with anastomosis. Surg Gynecol Obstet 135: 747, 1972

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Gill W, Fraser J, Carter DC, et al: Everted intestinal anastomoses. Surg Gynecol Obstet 128: 1297, 1969

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Goligher JC, Graham NG, de Dombal FT: Anastomostic dehiscence after anterior resection of rectum and sigmoid. Br J Surg 57: 109, 1970

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Goligher JC, Morris C, McAdam WA, et al: Controlled trial of inverting versus everting intestinal suture in clinical large bowel surgery. Br J Surg 57: 817, 1970

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Halsted WS: Circular suture of the intestine—an experimental study. Am J Med Sci 94: 436, 1887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hamilton JE: Reappraisal of open intestinal anastomoses. Ann Surg 165: 917, 1967

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Harvey SC: The velocity of the growth of fibroblasts in the healing wound. Arch Surg 18: 1227, 1929

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hawley PR: Causes and prevention of colonic anastomotic breakdown. Dis Colon Rectum 16: 272, 1973

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Herrmann JB, Woodward SC, Pulaski EJ: Healing of colonic anastomoses in the rat. Surg Gynecol Obstet 119: 269, 1964

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Herter FP, Slanetz CA Jr: Influence of antibiotic preparation of the bowel on complications after colon resection. Am J Surg 113: 165, 1967

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Horowitz IL: Colonic anastomosis—a new approach: Preliminary report. Dis Colon Rectum 19: 667, 1976

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lembert MA: Memoire sur l'enteroraphie avec la description d'un procede nouveau pour pratiquer cette operation chirurgicale. Repertoire General d'Anatomie et Physiologie Pathologiques 1, 2: 100, 1826

    Google Scholar 

  17. Linn BS, Reisman TM, Yurt RW, et al: Intestinal anastomosis by invagination: A historical review of a “new” technic with controlled study of its potential. Ann Surg 167: 393, 1968

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Localio SA, Casale W, Hinton JW: Wound healing—experimental and statistical study. III. Experimental observations. Surg Gynecol Obstet 77: 243, 1943

    Google Scholar 

  19. Loeb MJ: Comparative strength of inverted, everted, and end-on intestinal anastomoses. Surg Gynecol Obstet 125: 301, 1967

    Google Scholar 

  20. McAdams AJ, Meikle AG, Taylor JO: One layer or two layer colonic anastomoses? Am J Surg 120: 546, 1970

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Morgenstern L, Yamakawa T, Ben-Shoshan M, et al: Anastomotic leakage after low colonic anastomosis: Clinical and experimental aspects. Am J Surg 123: 104, 1972

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ravitch M, Steichen FM: Technics of staple suturing in the gastrointestinal tract. Ann Surg 175: 815, 1972

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sako Y, Wangensteen OH: Experimental studies on gastrointestinal anastomoses. Surg Forum 2: 117, 1951

    Google Scholar 

  24. Schrock T, Deveney CW, Dunphy JE: Factors contributing to leakage of colonic anastomoses. Ann Surg 177: 513, 1973

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Vandertoll DJ, Beahrs OH: Carcinoma of rectum and low sigmoid: Evaluation of anterior resection of 1,766 favorable lesions. Arch Surg 90: 793, 1965

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Long Island Jewish-Hillside Medical Center, 11040, New Hyde Park, New York

    Leonard C. Burson M.D., Stanley D. Berliner M.D., Richard J. Strauss M.D., Paul Katz M.D. &  Leslie Wise M.D.

  2. The School of Medicine, State University of New York (Stony Brook), Stony Brook, New York

    Leonard C. Burson M.D., Stanley D. Berliner M.D., Richard J. Strauss M.D., Paul Katz M.D. &  Leslie Wise M.D.

Authors
  1. Leonard C. Burson M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stanley D. Berliner M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Richard J. Strauss M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul Katz M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Leslie Wise M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

About this article

Cite this article

Burson, L.C., Berliner, S.D., Strauss, R.J. et al. Telescoping anastomosis of the colon: A comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 22, 111–116 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02586775

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02586775

Keywords

Search

Navigation