A Comparison of a Single Center’s Experience with Three Staple Line Reinforcement Techniques in 1,502 Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Patients

Tyler W Barreto, Paul R. Kemmeter, Matthew P. Paletta, Alan T. Davis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to compare outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) patients based on three types of staple line reinforcement (SLR): seromuscular suturing (imbrication), absorbable polymer membrane (APM), and bovine pericardial strips (BPS).

Background: LSG represented 67.3 % of bariatric procedures performed in Michigan in 2013, and its prevalence continues to rise. Multiple studies suggest that SLR can potentially reduce the incidence of complications. However, the current literature is limited secondary to a small sample size and is not conclusive on which type of reinforcement technique is best in reducing the risk of complications.

Methods: The charts of 1,526 consecutive patients who underwent an LSG from January 2005 to January 2013, by four experienced surgeons, were reviewed. Data include patient demographics, reinforcement technique utilized, length of hospitalization, complications, hospital readmission rates, and mortality.

Results: Of 1,502 patients who underwent an LSG and met inclusion/exclusion criteria, 373 (24.8 %) were reinforced using imbrication, 269 (17.9 %) with BPS, and 860 (57.3 %) with APM. Patient demographics and complication rates were similar between groups. A statistically significant difference occurred in length of stay, readmission, and reoperation rates (p < 0.01). Length of stay was shortest in the BPS group, but readmission and reoperation rates were statistically higher, and there was a trend towards increased leaks (p = 0.08).

Conclusions: A comparison of imbrication, BPS, and APM demonstrated significantly increased readmission and reoperation rates with a trend towards increased leak rates with the use of BPS in LSG patients. Hemorrhage was not statistically different between the three reinforcement techniques.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)418-422
Number of pages5
JournalObesity Surgery
Volume25
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Gastrectomy
Reoperation
Polymers
Membranes
Length of Stay
Demography
Bariatrics
Patient Readmission
Hospital Mortality
Sample Size
Hospitalization
Hemorrhage
Incidence

Keywords

  • Bariatric surgery
  • Sleeve gastrectomy
  • Staple line bleeds
  • Staple line leaks
  • Staple line reinforcement

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
  • Nutrition and Dietetics

Cite this

A Comparison of a Single Center’s Experience with Three Staple Line Reinforcement Techniques in 1,502 Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Patients. / Barreto, Tyler W; Kemmeter, Paul R.; Paletta, Matthew P.; Davis, Alan T.

In: Obesity Surgery, Vol. 25, No. 3, 01.01.2015, p. 418-422.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{40847f45ae4246898b8158af17b03b10,
title = "A Comparison of a Single Center’s Experience with Three Staple Line Reinforcement Techniques in 1,502 Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Patients",
abstract = "Objective: This study aimed to compare outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) patients based on three types of staple line reinforcement (SLR): seromuscular suturing (imbrication), absorbable polymer membrane (APM), and bovine pericardial strips (BPS).Background: LSG represented 67.3 {\%} of bariatric procedures performed in Michigan in 2013, and its prevalence continues to rise. Multiple studies suggest that SLR can potentially reduce the incidence of complications. However, the current literature is limited secondary to a small sample size and is not conclusive on which type of reinforcement technique is best in reducing the risk of complications.Methods: The charts of 1,526 consecutive patients who underwent an LSG from January 2005 to January 2013, by four experienced surgeons, were reviewed. Data include patient demographics, reinforcement technique utilized, length of hospitalization, complications, hospital readmission rates, and mortality.Results: Of 1,502 patients who underwent an LSG and met inclusion/exclusion criteria, 373 (24.8 {\%}) were reinforced using imbrication, 269 (17.9 {\%}) with BPS, and 860 (57.3 {\%}) with APM. Patient demographics and complication rates were similar between groups. A statistically significant difference occurred in length of stay, readmission, and reoperation rates (p < 0.01). Length of stay was shortest in the BPS group, but readmission and reoperation rates were statistically higher, and there was a trend towards increased leaks (p = 0.08).Conclusions: A comparison of imbrication, BPS, and APM demonstrated significantly increased readmission and reoperation rates with a trend towards increased leak rates with the use of BPS in LSG patients. Hemorrhage was not statistically different between the three reinforcement techniques.",
keywords = "Bariatric surgery, Sleeve gastrectomy, Staple line bleeds, Staple line leaks, Staple line reinforcement",
author = "Barreto, {Tyler W} and Kemmeter, {Paul R.} and Paletta, {Matthew P.} and Davis, {Alan T.}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s11695-014-1432-6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "418--422",
journal = "Obesity Surgery",
issn = "0960-8923",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Comparison of a Single Center’s Experience with Three Staple Line Reinforcement Techniques in 1,502 Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Patients

AU - Barreto, Tyler W

AU - Kemmeter, Paul R.

AU - Paletta, Matthew P.

AU - Davis, Alan T.

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Objective: This study aimed to compare outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) patients based on three types of staple line reinforcement (SLR): seromuscular suturing (imbrication), absorbable polymer membrane (APM), and bovine pericardial strips (BPS).Background: LSG represented 67.3 % of bariatric procedures performed in Michigan in 2013, and its prevalence continues to rise. Multiple studies suggest that SLR can potentially reduce the incidence of complications. However, the current literature is limited secondary to a small sample size and is not conclusive on which type of reinforcement technique is best in reducing the risk of complications.Methods: The charts of 1,526 consecutive patients who underwent an LSG from January 2005 to January 2013, by four experienced surgeons, were reviewed. Data include patient demographics, reinforcement technique utilized, length of hospitalization, complications, hospital readmission rates, and mortality.Results: Of 1,502 patients who underwent an LSG and met inclusion/exclusion criteria, 373 (24.8 %) were reinforced using imbrication, 269 (17.9 %) with BPS, and 860 (57.3 %) with APM. Patient demographics and complication rates were similar between groups. A statistically significant difference occurred in length of stay, readmission, and reoperation rates (p < 0.01). Length of stay was shortest in the BPS group, but readmission and reoperation rates were statistically higher, and there was a trend towards increased leaks (p = 0.08).Conclusions: A comparison of imbrication, BPS, and APM demonstrated significantly increased readmission and reoperation rates with a trend towards increased leak rates with the use of BPS in LSG patients. Hemorrhage was not statistically different between the three reinforcement techniques.

AB - Objective: This study aimed to compare outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) patients based on three types of staple line reinforcement (SLR): seromuscular suturing (imbrication), absorbable polymer membrane (APM), and bovine pericardial strips (BPS).Background: LSG represented 67.3 % of bariatric procedures performed in Michigan in 2013, and its prevalence continues to rise. Multiple studies suggest that SLR can potentially reduce the incidence of complications. However, the current literature is limited secondary to a small sample size and is not conclusive on which type of reinforcement technique is best in reducing the risk of complications.Methods: The charts of 1,526 consecutive patients who underwent an LSG from January 2005 to January 2013, by four experienced surgeons, were reviewed. Data include patient demographics, reinforcement technique utilized, length of hospitalization, complications, hospital readmission rates, and mortality.Results: Of 1,502 patients who underwent an LSG and met inclusion/exclusion criteria, 373 (24.8 %) were reinforced using imbrication, 269 (17.9 %) with BPS, and 860 (57.3 %) with APM. Patient demographics and complication rates were similar between groups. A statistically significant difference occurred in length of stay, readmission, and reoperation rates (p < 0.01). Length of stay was shortest in the BPS group, but readmission and reoperation rates were statistically higher, and there was a trend towards increased leaks (p = 0.08).Conclusions: A comparison of imbrication, BPS, and APM demonstrated significantly increased readmission and reoperation rates with a trend towards increased leak rates with the use of BPS in LSG patients. Hemorrhage was not statistically different between the three reinforcement techniques.

KW - Bariatric surgery

KW - Sleeve gastrectomy

KW - Staple line bleeds

KW - Staple line leaks

KW - Staple line reinforcement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84924042274&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84924042274&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11695-014-1432-6

DO - 10.1007/s11695-014-1432-6

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 418

EP - 422

JO - Obesity Surgery

JF - Obesity Surgery

SN - 0960-8923

IS - 3

ER -