Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparison of laparoscopic linear staplers in clinical practice.
Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2007 Jul-Aug; 3(4):446-50; discussion 450-1.SO

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Only one previous study has evaluated the clinical safety of the 2 laparoscopic linear stapling devices available. Our study compared these staplers using laparoscopic gastric bypass as the standard procedure.

METHODS

A total of 400 consecutive patients were prospectively studied. Group A (200 patients) underwent gastric bypass with the Endo-GIA Universal 6-row stapler (Autosuture) used, and group B (200 patients) underwent the procedure with the Ethicon 6-row stapler used. The measured parameters included stapler misfires, staple line bleeding, staple line leaks, unexplained gastrointestinal bleeding, unexplained intra-abdominal bleeding, total bleeding events, and total adverse events.

RESULTS

Both groups were similar in preoperative body mass index, age, and gender. Both groups had a single staple line leak (0.5%; P = 1.0). Three (0.25% of staple firings) misfires occurred in group B. No misfires occurred in group A (P = .25). Gastrointestinal bleeding, staple line bleeding, and unexplained intra-abdominal bleeding occurred in 6 (3%), 2 (1%), and 5 (2.5%) patients in group A and in 1 (0.5%), 0 (0%), and 2 (1%) patients in group B (P = .12, P = .5, and P = .45, respectively). Total bleeding events occurred in 13 patients (6.5%) in group A and in 3 patients (1.5%) in group B (P = 0.019). The total number of patients with an adverse event was 14 (7%) in group A and 7 (3.5%) in group B (P = .18).

CONCLUSION

The results of our study have shown that the Ethicon 6-row stapler had more misfires and the Autosuture Endo-GIA 6-row stapler resulted in more bleeding complications. Only the difference in total bleeding events reached statistical significance but the difference in the total number of adverse events was not statistically significant. Therefore, in our experience both devices were equally safe and effective.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Rocky Mountain Associated Physicians, Salt Lake City, Utah 84124, USA. SSimper@rmapinc.comNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

17400029

Citation

Simper, Steven C., et al. "Comparison of Laparoscopic Linear Staplers in Clinical Practice." Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases : Official Journal of the American Society for Bariatric Surgery, vol. 3, no. 4, 2007, pp. 446-50; discussion 450-1.
Simper SC, Erzinger JM, Smith SC. Comparison of laparoscopic linear staplers in clinical practice. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2007;3(4):446-50; discussion 450-1.
Simper, S. C., Erzinger, J. M., & Smith, S. C. (2007). Comparison of laparoscopic linear staplers in clinical practice. Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases : Official Journal of the American Society for Bariatric Surgery, 3(4), 446-50; discussion 450-1.
Simper SC, Erzinger JM, Smith SC. Comparison of Laparoscopic Linear Staplers in Clinical Practice. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2007 Jul-Aug;3(4):446-50; discussion 450-1. PubMed PMID: 17400029.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of laparoscopic linear staplers in clinical practice. AU - Simper,Steven C, AU - Erzinger,Joanna M, AU - Smith,Sherman C, Y1 - 2007/04/02/ PY - 2006/10/11/received PY - 2007/01/15/revised PY - 2007/02/10/accepted PY - 2007/4/3/pubmed PY - 2007/10/19/medline PY - 2007/4/3/entrez SP - 446-50; discussion 450-1 JF - Surgery for obesity and related diseases : official journal of the American Society for Bariatric Surgery JO - Surg Obes Relat Dis VL - 3 IS - 4 N2 - BACKGROUND: Only one previous study has evaluated the clinical safety of the 2 laparoscopic linear stapling devices available. Our study compared these staplers using laparoscopic gastric bypass as the standard procedure. METHODS: A total of 400 consecutive patients were prospectively studied. Group A (200 patients) underwent gastric bypass with the Endo-GIA Universal 6-row stapler (Autosuture) used, and group B (200 patients) underwent the procedure with the Ethicon 6-row stapler used. The measured parameters included stapler misfires, staple line bleeding, staple line leaks, unexplained gastrointestinal bleeding, unexplained intra-abdominal bleeding, total bleeding events, and total adverse events. RESULTS: Both groups were similar in preoperative body mass index, age, and gender. Both groups had a single staple line leak (0.5%; P = 1.0). Three (0.25% of staple firings) misfires occurred in group B. No misfires occurred in group A (P = .25). Gastrointestinal bleeding, staple line bleeding, and unexplained intra-abdominal bleeding occurred in 6 (3%), 2 (1%), and 5 (2.5%) patients in group A and in 1 (0.5%), 0 (0%), and 2 (1%) patients in group B (P = .12, P = .5, and P = .45, respectively). Total bleeding events occurred in 13 patients (6.5%) in group A and in 3 patients (1.5%) in group B (P = 0.019). The total number of patients with an adverse event was 14 (7%) in group A and 7 (3.5%) in group B (P = .18). CONCLUSION: The results of our study have shown that the Ethicon 6-row stapler had more misfires and the Autosuture Endo-GIA 6-row stapler resulted in more bleeding complications. Only the difference in total bleeding events reached statistical significance but the difference in the total number of adverse events was not statistically significant. Therefore, in our experience both devices were equally safe and effective. SN - 1550-7289 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/17400029/Comparison_of_laparoscopic_linear_staplers_in_clinical_practice_ L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1550-7289(07)00084-6 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -