4.4 Article

Bidirectional Jejunojejunal Anastomosis Prevents Early Small Bowel Obstruction Due to the Kinking After Closure of the Mesenteric Defect in the Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

期刊

OBESITY SURGERY
卷 28, 期 7, 页码 1838-1844

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-017-3094-7

关键词

Gastric bypass; Roux-en-Y; Kinking; Bowel obstruction; Intestinal obstruction; Mesenteric defect; Jejunojejunal anastomosis; Jejunojejunostomy; Postoperative complications

类别

资金

  1. Ethicon SAS (Johnson&Johnson Medical Devices Companies)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background The closure of the mesenteric defects (CMD) in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) reduces the risk of small bowel obstruction (SBO) due to internal hernia but might be associated with an increased risk of early SBO triggered by the jejunojejunal anastomosis (JJS) kinking. The aim of this study was to assess how enlarging the JJS with a bidirectional linear stapling can aid in avoiding the risk of early SBO by kinking. Materials and Methods This retrospective cohort study concerns 1327 patients who underwent RYGB with CMD between May 2007 and August 2016. The first 626 patients (group A) had a unidirectional JJS. The following 701 patients (group B) had a bidirectional side-to-side JJS and a hand-sewn closure of the remaining defect. We compared early SBO between the two groups. Results Eleven (1.75%) early SBO due to the JJS kinking occurred in group A, whereas none occurred in group B (p = 0.0012). Thirty-nine early postoperative complications happened in group A versus 32 in group B (p = 0.17). Nine (1.2%) digestive bleedings occurred in group B versus two (0.3%) in group A (OR = 4.05 [0.87-18], p = 0.054). Average operating time was 81 min [37-330] in group A and 77 min [33-240] in group B. Conclusion Enlarging the JJS with a bidirectional linear stapling is associated with a reduced risk of early SBO due to the anastomosis kinking. However, it could be related to an increased risk of digestive bleedings.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据