Cargando…

Three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts

BACKGROUND: Since most anastomoses after left-sided colorectal resections are performed with a circular stapler, any technological change in stapling devices may influence the incidence of anastomotic adverse events. The aim of the present study was to analyze the effect of a three-row circular stap...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Catarci, Marco, Guadagni, Stefano, Masedu, Francesco, Ruffo, Giacomo, Viola, Massimo G., Borghi, Felice, Baldazzi, Gianandrea, Scatizzi, Marco
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10442086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37195782
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JS9.0000000000000480
_version_ 1785093509922947072
author Catarci, Marco
Guadagni, Stefano
Masedu, Francesco
Ruffo, Giacomo
Viola, Massimo G.
Borghi, Felice
Baldazzi, Gianandrea
Scatizzi, Marco
author_facet Catarci, Marco
Guadagni, Stefano
Masedu, Francesco
Ruffo, Giacomo
Viola, Massimo G.
Borghi, Felice
Baldazzi, Gianandrea
Scatizzi, Marco
author_sort Catarci, Marco
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Since most anastomoses after left-sided colorectal resections are performed with a circular stapler, any technological change in stapling devices may influence the incidence of anastomotic adverse events. The aim of the present study was to analyze the effect of a three-row circular stapler on anastomotic leakage and related morbidity after left-sided colorectal resections. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A circular stapled anastomosis was performed in 4255 (50.9%) out of 8359 patients enrolled in two prospective multicenter studies in Italy, and, after exclusion criteria to reduce heterogeneity, 2799 (65.8%) cases were retrospectively analyzed through a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 20 covariates relative to patient characteristics, to surgery and to perioperative management. Two well-balanced groups of 425 patients each were obtained: group (A) – true population of interest, anastomosis performed with a three-row circular stapler; group (B) – control population, anastomosis performed with a two-row circular stapler. The target of inferences was the average treatment effect in the treated (ATT). The primary endpoints were overall and major anastomotic leakage and overall anastomotic bleeding; the secondary endpoints were overall and major morbidity and mortality rates. The results of multiple logistic regression analyses for the outcomes, including the 20 covariates selected for matching, were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Group A versus group B showed a significantly lower risk of overall anastomotic leakage (2.1 vs. 6.1%; OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.15–0.73; P=0.006), major anastomotic leakage (2.1 vs. 5.2%; OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.17–0.87; P=0.022), and major morbidity (3.5 vs. 6.6% events; OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.24–0.91; P=0.026). CONCLUSION: The use of three-row circular staplers independently reduced the risk of anastomotic leakage and related morbidity after left-sided colorectal resection. Twenty-five patients were required to avoid one leakage.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10442086
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104420862023-08-22 Three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts Catarci, Marco Guadagni, Stefano Masedu, Francesco Ruffo, Giacomo Viola, Massimo G. Borghi, Felice Baldazzi, Gianandrea Scatizzi, Marco Int J Surg Original Research BACKGROUND: Since most anastomoses after left-sided colorectal resections are performed with a circular stapler, any technological change in stapling devices may influence the incidence of anastomotic adverse events. The aim of the present study was to analyze the effect of a three-row circular stapler on anastomotic leakage and related morbidity after left-sided colorectal resections. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A circular stapled anastomosis was performed in 4255 (50.9%) out of 8359 patients enrolled in two prospective multicenter studies in Italy, and, after exclusion criteria to reduce heterogeneity, 2799 (65.8%) cases were retrospectively analyzed through a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 20 covariates relative to patient characteristics, to surgery and to perioperative management. Two well-balanced groups of 425 patients each were obtained: group (A) – true population of interest, anastomosis performed with a three-row circular stapler; group (B) – control population, anastomosis performed with a two-row circular stapler. The target of inferences was the average treatment effect in the treated (ATT). The primary endpoints were overall and major anastomotic leakage and overall anastomotic bleeding; the secondary endpoints were overall and major morbidity and mortality rates. The results of multiple logistic regression analyses for the outcomes, including the 20 covariates selected for matching, were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Group A versus group B showed a significantly lower risk of overall anastomotic leakage (2.1 vs. 6.1%; OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.15–0.73; P=0.006), major anastomotic leakage (2.1 vs. 5.2%; OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.17–0.87; P=0.022), and major morbidity (3.5 vs. 6.6% events; OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.24–0.91; P=0.026). CONCLUSION: The use of three-row circular staplers independently reduced the risk of anastomotic leakage and related morbidity after left-sided colorectal resection. Twenty-five patients were required to avoid one leakage. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023-05-17 /pmc/articles/PMC10442086/ /pubmed/37195782 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JS9.0000000000000480 Text en Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
spellingShingle Original Research
Catarci, Marco
Guadagni, Stefano
Masedu, Francesco
Ruffo, Giacomo
Viola, Massimo G.
Borghi, Felice
Baldazzi, Gianandrea
Scatizzi, Marco
Three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts
title Three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts
title_full Three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts
title_fullStr Three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts
title_full_unstemmed Three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts
title_short Three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts
title_sort three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the icral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10442086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37195782
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JS9.0000000000000480
work_keys_str_mv AT catarcimarco threerowversustworowcircularstaplersforleftsidedcolorectalanastomosisapropensityscorematchedanalysisoftheicral2and3prospectivecohorts
AT guadagnistefano threerowversustworowcircularstaplersforleftsidedcolorectalanastomosisapropensityscorematchedanalysisoftheicral2and3prospectivecohorts
AT masedufrancesco threerowversustworowcircularstaplersforleftsidedcolorectalanastomosisapropensityscorematchedanalysisoftheicral2and3prospectivecohorts
AT ruffogiacomo threerowversustworowcircularstaplersforleftsidedcolorectalanastomosisapropensityscorematchedanalysisoftheicral2and3prospectivecohorts
AT violamassimog threerowversustworowcircularstaplersforleftsidedcolorectalanastomosisapropensityscorematchedanalysisoftheicral2and3prospectivecohorts
AT borghifelice threerowversustworowcircularstaplersforleftsidedcolorectalanastomosisapropensityscorematchedanalysisoftheicral2and3prospectivecohorts
AT baldazzigianandrea threerowversustworowcircularstaplersforleftsidedcolorectalanastomosisapropensityscorematchedanalysisoftheicral2and3prospectivecohorts
AT scatizzimarco threerowversustworowcircularstaplersforleftsidedcolorectalanastomosisapropensityscorematchedanalysisoftheicral2and3prospectivecohorts