Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Blind nasogastric tube advancement following sleeve gastrectomy: an animal model

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Sleeve gastrectomy is an effective surgical treatment for morbid obesity. The major technical risk of this procedure is staple line dehiscence. Some surgeons are reluctant to place a nasogastric tube (NGT) blindly due to the perceived risk of damage to the staple line. We sought to determine whether such concern was warranted.

Methods

A porcine tissue model (Animal Technologies, Inc., Tyler, TX) was used. Sleeve gastrectomy was performed using a flexible gastroscope as a guide for the Endo GIA stapler (Covidien, New Haven, CT) in an identical fashion used in our patients. The specimen was then placed in a plastic model of the thorax (VATS Trainers, LLC. Lansing, MI). The NGT was blindly advanced to 55 cm for a total of 50 passes, and to 75 cm for another 50 passes. Endoscopy with water submersion was performed to evaluate for injury or leak.

Results

After multiple passes of the NGT, no significant injuries, leaks, or perforations were observed to the gastric model, except for several small petechiae of the gastric mucosa, the largest measuring approximately 3 mm. None were of full thickness or penetrated the mucosa. The staple line showed no evidence of trauma.

Conclusion

In this porcine model, blind NGT placement was not associated with significant mucosal injury or any damage to the sleeve gastrectomy staple line.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Depaula AL, Stival AR, Halpern A, Vencio S (2011) Surgical treatment of morbid obesity: mid-term outcomes of the laparoscopic ileal interposition associated to a sleeve gastrectomy in 120 patients. Obes Surg 21(5):668–675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-010-0232-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tan JT, Kariyawasam S, Wijeratne T, Chandraratna HS (2010) Diagnosis and management of gastric leaks after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity. Obes Surg 20(4):403–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-009-0020-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gill RS, Birch DW, Shi X, Sharma AM, Karmali S (2010) Sleeve gastrectomy and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review. Surg Obes Relat Dis 6(6):707–713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2010.07.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sarkhosh K, Birch DW, Shi X, Gill RS, Karmali S (2012) The impact of sleeve gastrectomy on hypertension: a systematic review. Obes Surg 22(5):832–837. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-012-0615-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kokkinos A, Alexiadou K, Liaskos C et al (2013) Improvement in cardiovascular indices after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity. Obes Surg 23(1):31–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-012-0743-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Campanile FC, Boru CE, Rizzello M et al (2013) Acute complications after laparoscopic bariatric procedures: update for the general surgeon. Langenbecks Arch Surg 398(5):669–686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-013-1077-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gagner M, Deitel M, Erickson AL, Crosby RD (2013) Survey on laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) at the fourth international consensus summit on sleeve gastrectomy. Obes Surg 23(12):2013–2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-013-1040-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Aurora AR, Khaitan L, Saber AA (2012) Sleeve gastrectomy and the risk of leak: a systematic analysis of 4,888 patients. Surg Endosc 26(6):1509–1515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-2085-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Causey MW, Fitzpatrick E, Carter P (2013) Pressure tolerance of newly constructed staple lines in sleeve gastrectomy and duodenal switch. Am J Surg 205(5):571–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2012.12.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. López-Monclova J, Soler ET, Ponz CB, Vilallonga R, Rodríguez-Gómez K, Baeza-Vitolas M (2013) Pilot study comparing the leak pressure of the sleeved stomach with and without reinforcement. Surg Endosc 27(12):4721–4730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3123-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Benedix F, Poranzke O, Adolf D et al (2017) Staple line leak after primary sleeve gastrectomy—risk factors and mid-term results: do patients still benefit from the weight loss procedure? Obes Surg 27(7):1780–1788. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-017-2543-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sakran N, Goitein D, Raziel A et al (2013) Gastric leaks after sleeve gastrectomy: a multicenter experience with 2,834 patients. Surg Endosc 27(1):240–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2426-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kasalicky M, Dolezel R, Vernerova E, Haluzik M (2014) Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy without over-sewing of the staple line is effective and safe. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne 9(1):46–52. https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2014.40387

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We extend our appreciation to Charles Albertson, Daniel Shovlin, and Sandy Waters for their technical support and expertise.

Funding

No extramural funding or grants were used for this project. Resources used were already available within the college.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Albany Medical College, 47 New Scotland Avenue MC-61, Albany, NY, 12208, USA

    Thomas Fabian & Tyler Robinson

  2. Department of Pediatrics, Phoenix Children’s Hospital, Phoenix, AZ, USA

    Lauren Naile

  3. Division of Anatomy, Department of Medical Education, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA

    Michael P. Smith

  4. Department of Medical Education, Patient Safety and Clinical Competency Center, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA

    Mara McErlean

Authors
  1. Thomas Fabian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tyler Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lauren Naile
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael P. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mara McErlean
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

T.F. and M.M. designed the study; T.F., L.N., T.R. and M.M. performed the literature review; T.F., M.M. and M.S. performed the experiment and analyzed the data; T.F., T.R., L.N. and M.M. wrote the manuscript. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tyler Robinson.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Drs. Fabian, Robinson, Naile, Smith, and McErlean have no conflicts of interest and no financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fabian, T., Robinson, T., Naile, L. et al. Blind nasogastric tube advancement following sleeve gastrectomy: an animal model. Surg Endosc 34, 257–260 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06760-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06760-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation