Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Intestinal mucosa staple line integrity and anastomotic leak pressure after healing in a porcine model

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgery Today Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate both the intestinal mucosa staple line integrity and anastomotic leak pressure after healing in a porcine survival model.

Methods

We used two suture models using two different size staples (incomplete mucosal closure model: group G [staple height 0.75 mm], complete mucosal closure model: group B [staple height 1.5 mm]) in the porcine ileum. Five staple lines were created in each group made in the ileum for each model, and the staple sites harvested on days 0, 2, and 7. The leak pressure at the staple site was measured at each time point.

Results

On day 0, the leak pressure for group G (79.5 mmHg) was significantly lower than that for group B (182.3 mmHg) (p < 0.01). On days 2 and 7, there was no significant difference between groups G and B (171 mmHg and 175.5 mmHg on day 2, 175.5 mmHg and 175.5 mmHg on day 7, p > 0.05). The histological findings in both groups showed similar healing at postoperative days 2 and 7.

Conclusion

The integrity of the mucosal staple lines was associated with the postoperative leak pressure on day 0. However, there was no association with the leak pressure at two days or more postoperatively in a porcine model.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yamamoto S, Ito M, Okuda J, Fujii S, Yamaguchi S, Yoshimura K, et al. Laparoscopic surgery for stage 0/I rectal carcinoma: short-term outcomes of a single-arm phase II trial. Ann Surg. 2013;258:283–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Yamamoto S, Inomata M, Katayama H, Mizusawa J, Etoh T, Konishi F, et al. Short-term surgical outcomes from a randomized controlled trial to evaluate laparoscopic and open D3 dissection for stage II/III colon cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study JCOG 0404. Ann Surg. 2014;260:23–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Amri R, Bordeianou LG, Sylla P, Berger DL. Renewed assessment of the stapled anastomosis with the increasing role of laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:2675–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Choy PY, Bissett IP, Docherty JG, Parry BR, Merrie A, Fitzgerald A. Stapled versus handsewn methods for ileocolic anastomoses. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004320.pub3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Morse BC, Simpson JP, Jones YR, Johnson BL, Knott BM, Kotrady JA. Determination of independent predictive factors for anastomotic leak: analysis of 682 intestinal anastomoses. Am J Surg. 2013;206:950–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rutegard M, Rutegard J. Anastomotic leakage in rectal cancer surgery: the role of blood perfusion. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;7:289–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Watanabe J, Ishibe A, Suwa Y, Suwa H, Ota M, Kunisaki C, et al. Indocyanine green fluorescence imaging to reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage in laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched cohort study. Surg Endosc. 2020;34:202–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Blanco-Colino R, Espin-Basany E. Intraoperative use of ICG fluorescence imaging to reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol. 2018;22:15–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Du CZ, Fan ZH, Yang YF, Yuan P, Gu J. Value of intra-operative Doppler sonographic measurements in predicting post-operative anastomotic leakage in rectal cancer: a prospective pilot study. Chin Med J (Engl). 2019;132:2168–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen H, Cai HK, Tang YH. An updated meta-analysis of transanal drainage tube for prevention of anastomotic leak in anterior resection for rectal cancer. Surg Oncol. 2018;27:333–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Shada AL, Rosenberger LH, Mentrikoski MJ, Silva MA, Feldman SH, Kleiner DE. Endoluminal negative-pressure therapy for preventing rectal anastomotic leaks: a pilot study in a pig model. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2014;15:123–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Thompson SE, Young MT, Lewis MT, Boronyak SM, Clymer JW, Fegelman EJ, et al. Initial assessment of mucosal capture and leak pressure after gastrointestinal stapling in a porcine model. Obes Surg. 2018;28:3446–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kanda Y. Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software “EZR” for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013;48:452–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Merkel S, Wang WY, Schmidt O, Dworak O, Wittekind C, Hohenberger W, et al. Locoregional recurrence in patients with anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal carcinoma. Colorectal Dis. 2001;3:154–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Bell SW, Walker KG, Rickard MJ, Sinclair G, Dent OF, Chapuis PH, et al. Anastomotic leakage after curative anterior resection results in a higher prevalence of local recurrence. Br J Surg. 2003;90:1261–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Nesbakken A, Nygaard K, Lunde OC. Outcome and late functional results after anastomotic leakage following mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2001;88:400–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Tanaka K, Okuda J, Yamamoto S, Ito M, Sakamoto K, Kokuba Y, et al. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic surgery with the double stapling technique for stage 0/I rectal carcinoma: a subgroup analysis of a multicenter, single-arm phase II trial. Surg Today. 2017;47:1215–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kimura M, Kuwabara Y, Taniwaki S, Mitsui A, Shibata Y, Ueno S. Improving the side-to-side stapled anastomosis: comparison of staplers for robust crotch formation. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2018;14:16–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Chekan E, Whelan RL. Surgical stapling device-tissue interactions: what surgeons need to know to improve patient outcomes. Med Devices (Auckl). 2014;7:305–18.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Ito M, Sugito M, Kobayashi A, Nishizawa Y, Tsunoda Y, Saito N. Relationship between multiple numbers of stapler firings during rectal division and anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic rectal resection. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008;23:703–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Yamamoto S, Kanai T, Osumi K, Yo K, Takano K, Tsutsui M, et al. Anastomotic leakage using linear stapling device with pre-attached bioabsorbable polyglycolic acid felt after laparoscopic anterior resection. Anticancer Res. 2017;37:7083–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Naito M, Yamanashi T, Nakamura T, Miura H, Tsutsui A, Sato T, et al. Safety and efficacy of a novel linear staple device with bioabsorbable polyglicolic acid felt in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2017;10:35–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Baker RS, Foote J, Kemmeter P, Brady R, Vroegop T, Serveld M. The science of stapling and leaks. Obes Surg. 2004;14:1290–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Penninckx FM, Kerremans RP, Geboes KJ. The healing of single-and double-row stapled circular anastomoses. Dis Colon Rectum. 1984;27:714–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Graffner H, Andersson L, Löwenhielm P, Walther B. The healing process of anastomoses of the colon. A comparative study using single, double-layer or stapled anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum. 1984;27:767–71.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Graffner H, Löwenhielm P, Walther B. The healing process in high and low anterior resection of the rectum. A comparative study in the pig, using stapling devices. Dis Colon Rectum. 1984;27:772–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Coss-Adame E, Rao SS, Valestin J, Ali-Azamar A, Remes-Troche JM. Accuracy and reproducibility of high-definition anorectal manometry and pressure topography analyses in healthy subjects. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;13:1143–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee YY, Erdogan A, Yu S, Dewitt A, Rao SSC. Anorectal manometry in defecatory disorders: a comparative analysis of high-resolution pressure topography and waveform manometry. J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2018;24:460–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Nishigori H, Ito M, Nishizawa Y. A novel transanal tube designed to prevent anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery: the WING DRAIN. Surg Today. 2017;47:513–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Nylund K, Hausken T, Ødegaard S, Eide GE, Gilja OH. Gastrointestinal wall thickness measured with transabdominal ultrasonography and its relationship to demographic factors in healthy subjects. Ultraschall Med. 2012;33:E225–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Higaki S, Nohara H, Saitoh Y, Akazawa A, Yanai H, Yoshida T, et al. Increased rectal wall thickness may predict relapse in ulcerative colitis: a pilot follow-up study by ultrasonographic colonoscopy. Endoscopy. 2002;34:212–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Macari M, Balthazar EJ. CT of bowel wall thickening: significance and pitfalls of interpretation. Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176:1105–16.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Takuya Ito and Kahori Igarashi for their expert assistance in animal care, and Dr. Yuko Homma and Dr. Toshiki Mimura for providing invaluable suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Division of Gastroenterological, General and Transplant Surgery, Jichi Medical University, 3311-1 Yakushiji, Shimotsuke, Tochigi, 329-0498, Japan

    Daishi Naoi, Hisanaga Horie, Koji Koinuma, Yuko Kumagai, Gaku Ota, Mineyuki Tojo, Yuji Kaneda, Shuji Hishikawa, Ai Sadatomo, Yoshiyuki Inoue, Alan Kawarai Lefor & Naohiro Sata

  2. Department of Pathology, Jichi Medical University, 3311-1 Yakushiji, Shimotsuke , Tochigi, 329-0498, Japan

    Noriyoshi Fukushima

Authors
  1. Daishi Naoi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hisanaga Horie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Koji Koinuma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yuko Kumagai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gaku Ota
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mineyuki Tojo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yuji Kaneda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Shuji Hishikawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Ai Sadatomo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Yoshiyuki Inoue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Noriyoshi Fukushima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Alan Kawarai Lefor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Naohiro Sata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daishi Naoi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no financial conflicts of interest to declare.

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

Naoi, D., Horie, H., Koinuma, K. et al. Intestinal mucosa staple line integrity and anastomotic leak pressure after healing in a porcine model. Surg Today 51, 1713–1719 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-021-02267-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-021-02267-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation