Stapled versus sutured gastrointestinal anastomoses in the trauma patient: a multicenter trial

Journal of Trauma

Volumn 51, Issue 6, 2001, Pages 1054-1061

  Brundage, Susan I ^a   Jurkovich, Gregory J ^b   Hoyt, David B ^c   Patel, Nirav Y ^c   Ross, Steven E ^d   Marburger, Robert ^d   Stoner, Michael ^e   Ivatury, Rao R ^e   Ku, James ^f   Rutherford, Edmund J ^f   Maier, Ronald V ^b  

^a BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MEDICINE AND DENTISTRY OF NEW JERSEY   (United States)

^e VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL ABSCESS; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANASTOMOSIS LEAKAGE; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICE; ENTEROCUTANEOUS FISTULA; FEMALE; HUMAN; INJURY SCALE; INTESTINE ANASTOMOSIS; INTESTINE INJURY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGISTER; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURGICAL STAPLING; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SUTURE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANASTOMOSIS, SURGICAL; CALIFORNIA; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; COHORT STUDIES; DIGESTIVE SYSTEM; DIGESTIVE SYSTEM SURGICAL PROCEDURES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; INJURY SEVERITY SCORE; MALE; MEDICAL RECORDS; MIDDLE AGED; NEW JERSEY; NORTH CAROLINA; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SUTURES; UNITED STATES; VIRGINIA; WASHINGTON;

EID: 0035678784     PISSN: 00225282     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005373-200112000-00005     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Adloff M, Arnaud JP, Beehary S. Stapled versus sutured colorectal anastomosis. Arch Surg. 1980; 115: 1436-1438.
2. Beart RW, Kelly KA. Randomized prospective evaluation of the EEA stapler for colorectal anastomoses. Am J Surg. 1981; 141: 143-147.
3. Brennan SS, Pickford IR, Evans M, et al. Staples or sutures for colonic anastomoses: a controlled clinical trial. Br J Surg. 1982; 69: 722-724.
4. Chassin JL, Rifkind KM, Sussman B, et al. The stapled gastrointestinal tract anastomosis: incidence of postoperative complications compared with the sutured anastomoses. Ann Surg. 1978; 188: 689-696.
5. Didolkar MS, Reed WP, Elias EG, et al. A prospective randomized study of sutured versus stapled bowel anastomoses in patients with cancer. Cancer. 1986; 57: 456-460.
6. Everett WG, Friend PJ, Forty J. Comparison of stapling and hand suture for left sided large bowel anastomosis. Br J Surg. 1986; 73: 345-348.
7. Fazio VW, Jagelman DG, Lavery IC, et al. Evaluation of the proximate ILS circular stapler: a prospective study. Ann Surg. 1985; 201: 108-114.
8. George WD. Suturing or stapling in gastrointestinal surgery: a prospective randomized study. Br J Surg. 1991; 78: 337-341.
9. McGinn FP, Gartell PC, Clifford PC, et al. Staples or sutures for low colorectal anastomoses: a prospective randomized comparison. Br J Surg. 1985; 72: 603-605.
10. Reiling RB, Reiling WA, Bernie WA, et al. Prospective controlled study of gastrointestinal stapled anastomoses. Am J Surg. 1980; 139: 147-152.
11. Scher KS, Scott-Conner CEH, Jones CW, et al. Comparison of stapled and sutured anastomoses in colonic operations. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1982; 155: 489-493.
12. Seufort RM, Scmidt-Mathiesen A, Beyer A. Total gastrectomy and esophageal jejunostomy: a prospective randomized trial of hand sutured versus mechanically stapled anastomoses. Br J Surg. 1990; 77: 50-52.
13. Brundage SI, Grossman DC, Jurkovich GJ, Tong TC, Mack CD, Maier RV. Stapled versus sutured gastrointestinal anastomoses in the trauma patient. J Trauma. 1999; 47: 500-507.
14. Witzke JD, Kraatz JJ, Morken JM, et al. Stapled versus hand sewn anastomoses in patients with small bowel injury: a changing perspective. J Trauma. 2000; 49: 660-665.
15. Stone HH, Fabian TC. Management of perforating colon trauma: randomization between primary closure and exteriorization. Ann Surg. 1979; 190: 430-436.
16. Falcone RE, Wanamaker SR, Santanello SA, Carey LC. Colorectal trauma: primary repair or anastomosis with intracolonic bypass vs. ostomy. Dis Colon Rectum. 1992; 35: 957-963.
17. Sasaki LS, Allaben RD, Golwala R, Mittal VK. Primary repair of colon injuries: a prospective randomized study. J Trauma. 1995; 39: 895-901.
18. Chappuis CW, Frey DJ, Dietzen CD, Panetta TP, Buechter KJ, Cohn I. Management of penetrating colon injuries: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg. 1991; 213: 492-497.
19. Gonzalez RP, Merlotti GJ, Holevar MR. Colostomy in penetrating colon injury: is it necessary? J Trauma. 1996; 41: 271-275.
20. Cornwell EE, Velmahos GC, Berne TV, et al. The fate of colonic suture lines in high-risk trauma patients: a prospective analysis. J Am Coll Surg. 1998; 187: 58-63.
21. Burch JM, Franciose RJ, Moore EE, Biffl WL, Offner PJ. Single-layer continuous versus two-layer interrupted intestinal anastomosis. Ann Surg. 2000; 231: 832-837.
22. Package Insert, Linear GIA, U.S. Surgical Corporation, North Haven, Connecticut; 1999.
23. Kafie F, Tominaga GT, Yoong B, Waxman K. Factors related to outcome in blunt intestinal injuries requiring operation. Am Surg. 1997; 63: 889-892.
24. Renz BM, Feliciano DV. Unnecessary laparotomies for trauma: a prospective study of morbidity. J Trauma. 1995; 38: 350-356.