Two-row, three-row or powered circular stapler, which to choose when performing colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose Three types of circular staplers can be used to perform a colorectal anastomosis: two-row (MCS), three-row (TRCS) and powered (PCS) devices. The objective of this meta-analysis has been to provide the existing evidence on which of these circular staplers would have a lower risk of presenting...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Martin-Arévalo, J, Pla-Martí, V, Huntley, D, García-Botello, S, Pérez-Santiago, L, Izquierdo-Moreno, A, Garzón-Hernández, L, Garcés-Albir, M, Espí-Macías, A, Moro-Valdezate, D
Formato: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2024
País:España
Recursos:INCLIVA
Repositorio:r-INCLIVA. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica de INCLIVA
OAI Identifier:oai:incliva.fundanetsuite.com:p18222
Acesso em linha:https://incliva.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/18222
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:Two-row manual circular stapler
Three-row manual circular stapler
Powered circular stapler
Anastomotic leak
Anastomotic bleed
Postoperative anastomotic complications
id ES_59d1fa066eb5bafd51a76e771b93e2b2
oai_identifier_str oai:incliva.fundanetsuite.com:p18222
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Two-row, three-row or powered circular stapler, which to choose when performing colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysisMartin-Arévalo, JPla-Martí, VHuntley, DGarcía-Botello, SPérez-Santiago, LIzquierdo-Moreno, AGarzón-Hernández, LGarcés-Albir, MEspí-Macías, AMoro-Valdezate, DTwo-row manual circular staplerThree-row manual circular staplerPowered circular staplerAnastomotic leakAnastomotic bleedPostoperative anastomotic complicationsPurpose Three types of circular staplers can be used to perform a colorectal anastomosis: two-row (MCS), three-row (TRCS) and powered (PCS) devices. The objective of this meta-analysis has been to provide the existing evidence on which of these circular staplers would have a lower risk of presenting a leak (AL) and/or anastomotic bleeding (AB).Methods An in-depth search was carried out in the electronic bibliographic databases Embase, PubMed and SCOPUS. Observational studies were included, since randomized clinical trials comparing circular staplers were not found.Results In the case of AL, seven studies met the inclusion criteria in the PCS group and four in the TRCS group. In the case of AB, only four studies could be included in the analysis in the PCS group. The AL OR reported for PCS was 0.402 (95%-confidence interval (95%-CI): 0.266-0.608) and for AB: 0.2 (95% CI: 0.08-0.52). The OR obtained for AL in TRCS was 0.446 (95%-CI: 0.217 to 0.916). Risk difference for AL in PCS was - 0.06 (95% CI: - 0.07 to - 0.04) and in TRCS was - 0.04 (95%-CI: - 0.08 to - 0.01). Subgroup analysis did not report significant differences between groups. On the other hand, the AB OR obtained for PCS was 0.2 (95% CI: 0.08-0.52). In this case, no significant differences were observed in subgroup analysis.Conclusion PCS presented a significantly lower risk of leakage and anastomotic bleeding while TRCS only demonstrated a risk reduction in AL. Risk difference of AL was superior in the PCS than in TRCS.SPRINGER2024info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttps://incliva.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/18222INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASEISSN: 01791958ISSNe: 14321262reponame:r-INCLIVA. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica de INCLIVAinstname:INCLIVAInglésinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:incliva.fundanetsuite.com:p182222026-06-07T16:35:31Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Two-row, three-row or powered circular stapler, which to choose when performing colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis
title Two-row, three-row or powered circular stapler, which to choose when performing colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis
spellingShingle Two-row, three-row or powered circular stapler, which to choose when performing colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis
Martin-Arévalo, J
Two-row manual circular stapler
Three-row manual circular stapler
Powered circular stapler
Anastomotic leak
Anastomotic bleed
Postoperative anastomotic complications
title_short Two-row, three-row or powered circular stapler, which to choose when performing colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Two-row, three-row or powered circular stapler, which to choose when performing colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Two-row, three-row or powered circular stapler, which to choose when performing colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Two-row, three-row or powered circular stapler, which to choose when performing colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort Two-row, three-row or powered circular stapler, which to choose when performing colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Martin-Arévalo, J
Pla-Martí, V
Huntley, D
García-Botello, S
Pérez-Santiago, L
Izquierdo-Moreno, A
Garzón-Hernández, L
Garcés-Albir, M
Espí-Macías, A
Moro-Valdezate, D
author Martin-Arévalo, J
author_facet Martin-Arévalo, J
Pla-Martí, V
Huntley, D
García-Botello, S
Pérez-Santiago, L
Izquierdo-Moreno, A
Garzón-Hernández, L
Garcés-Albir, M
Espí-Macías, A
Moro-Valdezate, D
author_role author
author2 Pla-Martí, V
Huntley, D
García-Botello, S
Pérez-Santiago, L
Izquierdo-Moreno, A
Garzón-Hernández, L
Garcés-Albir, M
Espí-Macías, A
Moro-Valdezate, D
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Two-row manual circular stapler
Three-row manual circular stapler
Powered circular stapler
Anastomotic leak
Anastomotic bleed
Postoperative anastomotic complications
topic Two-row manual circular stapler
Three-row manual circular stapler
Powered circular stapler
Anastomotic leak
Anastomotic bleed
Postoperative anastomotic complications
description Purpose Three types of circular staplers can be used to perform a colorectal anastomosis: two-row (MCS), three-row (TRCS) and powered (PCS) devices. The objective of this meta-analysis has been to provide the existing evidence on which of these circular staplers would have a lower risk of presenting a leak (AL) and/or anastomotic bleeding (AB).Methods An in-depth search was carried out in the electronic bibliographic databases Embase, PubMed and SCOPUS. Observational studies were included, since randomized clinical trials comparing circular staplers were not found.Results In the case of AL, seven studies met the inclusion criteria in the PCS group and four in the TRCS group. In the case of AB, only four studies could be included in the analysis in the PCS group. The AL OR reported for PCS was 0.402 (95%-confidence interval (95%-CI): 0.266-0.608) and for AB: 0.2 (95% CI: 0.08-0.52). The OR obtained for AL in TRCS was 0.446 (95%-CI: 0.217 to 0.916). Risk difference for AL in PCS was - 0.06 (95% CI: - 0.07 to - 0.04) and in TRCS was - 0.04 (95%-CI: - 0.08 to - 0.01). Subgroup analysis did not report significant differences between groups. On the other hand, the AB OR obtained for PCS was 0.2 (95% CI: 0.08-0.52). In this case, no significant differences were observed in subgroup analysis.Conclusion PCS presented a significantly lower risk of leakage and anastomotic bleeding while TRCS only demonstrated a risk reduction in AL. Risk difference of AL was superior in the PCS than in TRCS.
publishDate 2024
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2024
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://incliva.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/18222
url https://incliva.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/18222
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv SPRINGER
publisher.none.fl_str_mv SPRINGER
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE
ISSN: 01791958
ISSNe: 14321262
reponame:r-INCLIVA. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica de INCLIVA
instname:INCLIVA
instname_str INCLIVA
reponame_str r-INCLIVA. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica de INCLIVA
collection r-INCLIVA. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica de INCLIVA
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869408652141527040
score 15,812429

Registos relacionados