Cargando…

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Gripping Surface Technology Staple Reloads versus Standard Staple Reloads Used with Manual Linear Surgical Staplers

PURPOSE: Linear surgical staplers reduce rates of surgical adverse events (bleeding, leaks, infections) compared to manual sutures thereby reducing patient risks, surgeon workflow disruption, and healthcare costs. However, further improvements are needed. Ethicon Gripping Surface Technology (GST) re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fortin, Stephen P, Petraiuolo, William, Cafri, Guy, Scapini, Gustavo, Agarwal, Pratyush, Chakke, Divya, Johnston, Stephen, Johnson, Barbara H, Coplan, Paul M, Zhang, Shumin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9762253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36545363
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S393881
_version_ 1784852824756060160
author Fortin, Stephen P
Petraiuolo, William
Cafri, Guy
Scapini, Gustavo
Agarwal, Pratyush
Chakke, Divya
Johnston, Stephen
Johnson, Barbara H
Coplan, Paul M
Zhang, Shumin
author_facet Fortin, Stephen P
Petraiuolo, William
Cafri, Guy
Scapini, Gustavo
Agarwal, Pratyush
Chakke, Divya
Johnston, Stephen
Johnson, Barbara H
Coplan, Paul M
Zhang, Shumin
author_sort Fortin, Stephen P
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Linear surgical staplers reduce rates of surgical adverse events (bleeding, leaks, infections) compared to manual sutures thereby reducing patient risks, surgeon workflow disruption, and healthcare costs. However, further improvements are needed. Ethicon Gripping Surface Technology (GST) reloads, tested and approved by regulatory authorities in combination with powered staplers, may reduce surgical risks through improved tissue grip. While manual staplers are used in some regions due to affordability, clinical data on GST reloads used with manual staplers are unavailable. This study compared surgical adverse event rates of manual staplers with GST vs standard reloads. These data may be used for label changes in China and Latin America. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing general or thoracic surgery between October 1, 2015 and August 31, 2021 using ECHELON FLEX™ manual staplers with GST or standard reloads were identified from the Premier Healthcare Database. GST reloads were compared to standard reloads for non-inferiority in bleeding and anastomotic leak for general surgery. Secondary outcomes included sepsis for general surgery, and bleeding and prolonged air leak for thoracic surgery. Covariate balancing was performed using stable balancing weights. RESULTS: The general and thoracic surgery cohorts contained 4571 (GST: 2780; standard: 1791) and 814 (GST: 514; standard: 300) patients, respectively. GST reloads were non-inferior to standard reloads for bleeding and anastomotic leak (adjusted cumulative incidence ratio: 1.02 [90% CI: 0.71, 1.45] and 1.03 [90% CI: 0.72, 1.46], respectively) for general surgery. Compared with standard reloads, GST reloads had a similar incidence of sepsis (2.2% vs 2.1%) for general surgery and lower incidences of bleeding (9.5% vs 16.0%) and prolonged air leak (12.6% vs 14.0%,) for thoracic surgery. CONCLUSION: GST reloads, compared to standard reloads, used with ECHELON FLEX™ manual staplers had comparable perioperative bleeding and anastomotic leak for general surgery, and lower incidences of safety events for thoracic surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9762253
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97622532022-12-20 Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Gripping Surface Technology Staple Reloads versus Standard Staple Reloads Used with Manual Linear Surgical Staplers Fortin, Stephen P Petraiuolo, William Cafri, Guy Scapini, Gustavo Agarwal, Pratyush Chakke, Divya Johnston, Stephen Johnson, Barbara H Coplan, Paul M Zhang, Shumin Med Devices (Auckl) Original Research PURPOSE: Linear surgical staplers reduce rates of surgical adverse events (bleeding, leaks, infections) compared to manual sutures thereby reducing patient risks, surgeon workflow disruption, and healthcare costs. However, further improvements are needed. Ethicon Gripping Surface Technology (GST) reloads, tested and approved by regulatory authorities in combination with powered staplers, may reduce surgical risks through improved tissue grip. While manual staplers are used in some regions due to affordability, clinical data on GST reloads used with manual staplers are unavailable. This study compared surgical adverse event rates of manual staplers with GST vs standard reloads. These data may be used for label changes in China and Latin America. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing general or thoracic surgery between October 1, 2015 and August 31, 2021 using ECHELON FLEX™ manual staplers with GST or standard reloads were identified from the Premier Healthcare Database. GST reloads were compared to standard reloads for non-inferiority in bleeding and anastomotic leak for general surgery. Secondary outcomes included sepsis for general surgery, and bleeding and prolonged air leak for thoracic surgery. Covariate balancing was performed using stable balancing weights. RESULTS: The general and thoracic surgery cohorts contained 4571 (GST: 2780; standard: 1791) and 814 (GST: 514; standard: 300) patients, respectively. GST reloads were non-inferior to standard reloads for bleeding and anastomotic leak (adjusted cumulative incidence ratio: 1.02 [90% CI: 0.71, 1.45] and 1.03 [90% CI: 0.72, 1.46], respectively) for general surgery. Compared with standard reloads, GST reloads had a similar incidence of sepsis (2.2% vs 2.1%) for general surgery and lower incidences of bleeding (9.5% vs 16.0%) and prolonged air leak (12.6% vs 14.0%,) for thoracic surgery. CONCLUSION: GST reloads, compared to standard reloads, used with ECHELON FLEX™ manual staplers had comparable perioperative bleeding and anastomotic leak for general surgery, and lower incidences of safety events for thoracic surgery. Dove 2022-12-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9762253/ /pubmed/36545363 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S393881 Text en © 2022 Fortin et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Fortin, Stephen P
Petraiuolo, William
Cafri, Guy
Scapini, Gustavo
Agarwal, Pratyush
Chakke, Divya
Johnston, Stephen
Johnson, Barbara H
Coplan, Paul M
Zhang, Shumin
Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Gripping Surface Technology Staple Reloads versus Standard Staple Reloads Used with Manual Linear Surgical Staplers
title Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Gripping Surface Technology Staple Reloads versus Standard Staple Reloads Used with Manual Linear Surgical Staplers
title_full Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Gripping Surface Technology Staple Reloads versus Standard Staple Reloads Used with Manual Linear Surgical Staplers
title_fullStr Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Gripping Surface Technology Staple Reloads versus Standard Staple Reloads Used with Manual Linear Surgical Staplers
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Gripping Surface Technology Staple Reloads versus Standard Staple Reloads Used with Manual Linear Surgical Staplers
title_short Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Gripping Surface Technology Staple Reloads versus Standard Staple Reloads Used with Manual Linear Surgical Staplers
title_sort comparison of clinical outcomes of gripping surface technology staple reloads versus standard staple reloads used with manual linear surgical staplers
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9762253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36545363
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S393881
work_keys_str_mv AT fortinstephenp comparisonofclinicaloutcomesofgrippingsurfacetechnologystaplereloadsversusstandardstaplereloadsusedwithmanuallinearsurgicalstaplers
AT petraiuolowilliam comparisonofclinicaloutcomesofgrippingsurfacetechnologystaplereloadsversusstandardstaplereloadsusedwithmanuallinearsurgicalstaplers
AT cafriguy comparisonofclinicaloutcomesofgrippingsurfacetechnologystaplereloadsversusstandardstaplereloadsusedwithmanuallinearsurgicalstaplers
AT scapinigustavo comparisonofclinicaloutcomesofgrippingsurfacetechnologystaplereloadsversusstandardstaplereloadsusedwithmanuallinearsurgicalstaplers
AT agarwalpratyush comparisonofclinicaloutcomesofgrippingsurfacetechnologystaplereloadsversusstandardstaplereloadsusedwithmanuallinearsurgicalstaplers
AT chakkedivya comparisonofclinicaloutcomesofgrippingsurfacetechnologystaplereloadsversusstandardstaplereloadsusedwithmanuallinearsurgicalstaplers
AT johnstonstephen comparisonofclinicaloutcomesofgrippingsurfacetechnologystaplereloadsversusstandardstaplereloadsusedwithmanuallinearsurgicalstaplers
AT johnsonbarbarah comparisonofclinicaloutcomesofgrippingsurfacetechnologystaplereloadsversusstandardstaplereloadsusedwithmanuallinearsurgicalstaplers
AT coplanpaulm comparisonofclinicaloutcomesofgrippingsurfacetechnologystaplereloadsversusstandardstaplereloadsusedwithmanuallinearsurgicalstaplers
AT zhangshumin comparisonofclinicaloutcomesofgrippingsurfacetechnologystaplereloadsversusstandardstaplereloadsusedwithmanuallinearsurgicalstaplers