Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Lustosa,Suzana Angélica da Silva
Data de Publicação: 2002
Outros Autores: Matos,Delcio, Atallah,Álvaro Nagib, Castro,Aldemar Araujo
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: São Paulo medical journal (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802002000500002
Resumo: CONTEXT: The interest in the results from comparisons between handsewing and stapling in colorectal anastomoses has been reflected in the progressive increase in the number of clinical trials. These studies, however, do not permit conclusions to be drawn, given the lack of statistical power of the samples analyzed. OBJECTIVE: To compare stapling and handsewing in colorectal anastomosis, testing the hypothesis that in colorectal anastomosis the technique of stapling is superior to that of handsewing. DESIGN: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. SURVEY STRATEGY: Systematic revision of the literature and meta-analysis were used, without restrictions on language, dates or other considerations. The sources of information used were Embase, Lilacs, Medline, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Database, and letters to authors and industrial producers of staples and thread. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were included in accordance with randomization criteria. The external validity of the studies was investigated via the characteristics of the participants, the interventions and the variables analyzed. An independent selection of clinical studies focusing on analysis of adult patients attended to on an elective basis was made by two reviewers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by the same reviewers. In addition to the randomization criteria, the masking, treatment intention, losses and exclusions were also analyzed. The meta-analysis was performed using risk difference and weighted average difference, with their respective 95% confidence intervals. The variables studied were mortality, clinical and radiological anastomotic dehiscence, anastomotic stricture, hemorrhage, reoperation, wound infection, time taken to perform the anastomosis and hospital stay. RESULTS: Nine clinical trials were selected. After verifying that it was possible to perform one of the two techniques being compared, 1,233 patients were included, of whom 622 underwent stapling and 611 the handsewing technique. No statistical difference was found between the variables, except for stenosis, which was more frequent in stapling (p < 0.05), and the time taken to perform the anastomosis, which was greater in handsewing (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The evidence found was insufficient to demonstrate superiority of the stapling method over handsewing, independent of the level of colorectal anastomosis.
id APM-1_c2ac6527fa25665bc69f059de894402b
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1516-31802002000500002
network_acronym_str APM-1
network_name_str São Paulo medical journal (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trialsSurgical anastomosisSystematic reviewMeta-analysisColorectal surgeryCONTEXT: The interest in the results from comparisons between handsewing and stapling in colorectal anastomoses has been reflected in the progressive increase in the number of clinical trials. These studies, however, do not permit conclusions to be drawn, given the lack of statistical power of the samples analyzed. OBJECTIVE: To compare stapling and handsewing in colorectal anastomosis, testing the hypothesis that in colorectal anastomosis the technique of stapling is superior to that of handsewing. DESIGN: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. SURVEY STRATEGY: Systematic revision of the literature and meta-analysis were used, without restrictions on language, dates or other considerations. The sources of information used were Embase, Lilacs, Medline, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Database, and letters to authors and industrial producers of staples and thread. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were included in accordance with randomization criteria. The external validity of the studies was investigated via the characteristics of the participants, the interventions and the variables analyzed. An independent selection of clinical studies focusing on analysis of adult patients attended to on an elective basis was made by two reviewers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by the same reviewers. In addition to the randomization criteria, the masking, treatment intention, losses and exclusions were also analyzed. The meta-analysis was performed using risk difference and weighted average difference, with their respective 95% confidence intervals. The variables studied were mortality, clinical and radiological anastomotic dehiscence, anastomotic stricture, hemorrhage, reoperation, wound infection, time taken to perform the anastomosis and hospital stay. RESULTS: Nine clinical trials were selected. After verifying that it was possible to perform one of the two techniques being compared, 1,233 patients were included, of whom 622 underwent stapling and 611 the handsewing technique. No statistical difference was found between the variables, except for stenosis, which was more frequent in stapling (p < 0.05), and the time taken to perform the anastomosis, which was greater in handsewing (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The evidence found was insufficient to demonstrate superiority of the stapling method over handsewing, independent of the level of colorectal anastomosis.Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM2002-07-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802002000500002Sao Paulo Medical Journal v.120 n.5 2002reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online)instname:Associação Paulista de Medicinainstacron:APM10.1590/S1516-31802002000500002info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLustosa,Suzana Angélica da SilvaMatos,DelcioAtallah,Álvaro NagibCastro,Aldemar Araujoeng2002-11-11T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1516-31802002000500002Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/spmjhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevistas@apm.org.br1806-94601516-3180opendoar:2002-11-11T00:00São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicinafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
title Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
spellingShingle Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
Lustosa,Suzana Angélica da Silva
Surgical anastomosis
Systematic review
Meta-analysis
Colorectal surgery
title_short Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
title_full Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
title_sort Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
author Lustosa,Suzana Angélica da Silva
author_facet Lustosa,Suzana Angélica da Silva
Matos,Delcio
Atallah,Álvaro Nagib
Castro,Aldemar Araujo
author_role author
author2 Matos,Delcio
Atallah,Álvaro Nagib
Castro,Aldemar Araujo
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Lustosa,Suzana Angélica da Silva
Matos,Delcio
Atallah,Álvaro Nagib
Castro,Aldemar Araujo
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Surgical anastomosis
Systematic review
Meta-analysis
Colorectal surgery
topic Surgical anastomosis
Systematic review
Meta-analysis
Colorectal surgery
description CONTEXT: The interest in the results from comparisons between handsewing and stapling in colorectal anastomoses has been reflected in the progressive increase in the number of clinical trials. These studies, however, do not permit conclusions to be drawn, given the lack of statistical power of the samples analyzed. OBJECTIVE: To compare stapling and handsewing in colorectal anastomosis, testing the hypothesis that in colorectal anastomosis the technique of stapling is superior to that of handsewing. DESIGN: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. SURVEY STRATEGY: Systematic revision of the literature and meta-analysis were used, without restrictions on language, dates or other considerations. The sources of information used were Embase, Lilacs, Medline, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Database, and letters to authors and industrial producers of staples and thread. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were included in accordance with randomization criteria. The external validity of the studies was investigated via the characteristics of the participants, the interventions and the variables analyzed. An independent selection of clinical studies focusing on analysis of adult patients attended to on an elective basis was made by two reviewers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by the same reviewers. In addition to the randomization criteria, the masking, treatment intention, losses and exclusions were also analyzed. The meta-analysis was performed using risk difference and weighted average difference, with their respective 95% confidence intervals. The variables studied were mortality, clinical and radiological anastomotic dehiscence, anastomotic stricture, hemorrhage, reoperation, wound infection, time taken to perform the anastomosis and hospital stay. RESULTS: Nine clinical trials were selected. After verifying that it was possible to perform one of the two techniques being compared, 1,233 patients were included, of whom 622 underwent stapling and 611 the handsewing technique. No statistical difference was found between the variables, except for stenosis, which was more frequent in stapling (p < 0.05), and the time taken to perform the anastomosis, which was greater in handsewing (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The evidence found was insufficient to demonstrate superiority of the stapling method over handsewing, independent of the level of colorectal anastomosis.
publishDate 2002
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2002-07-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802002000500002
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802002000500002
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S1516-31802002000500002
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Sao Paulo Medical Journal v.120 n.5 2002
reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online)
instname:Associação Paulista de Medicina
instacron:APM
instname_str Associação Paulista de Medicina
instacron_str APM
institution APM
reponame_str São Paulo medical journal (Online)
collection São Paulo medical journal (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicina
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revistas@apm.org.br
_version_ 1754209260462407680