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 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.

Short-term outcomes associated with the use of a new powered circular stapler for rectal reconstructions: a retrospective study comparing it to manual circular staplers using inverse probability of treatment weight analysis

BACKGROUND

The most common postoperative complication in malignant rectal surgery is anastomotic leakage (AL). AL after anterior or low anterior resection in rectal tumors is a fatal postoperative complication. Recently, the first automated suture circular stapler, which is expected to reduce the incidence of AL, (J&J). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included a total of 248 rectal tumor patients who underwent double stapler technique (DST) anastomotic procedures in the department of gastroenterological surgery /pediatric surgery at Gifu University School of Medicine from January 2017 to December 2021. The experience of a single institution utilizing the The Echelon circular™ stapler (ECP stapler:Manual VS Automatic) in rectal surgery cases was evaluated retrospectively from maintained database.

RESULT

One hundred thirty-nine patients (58.4%) were performed by manual circular stapling, 99 patients (41.6%) by powerd circular stapling. Diverting stoma was performed in 45 cases (32.4%) by manual circular stapling, 42 patients (42.4%) by powerd circular stapling Postoperative complications were occurred clavien-dindo grade II or higher in 57 cases (23.9%) and grade III or higher in 20 cases (8.4%). Anastomotic leakage occurred in 14 patients (5.9%) within all grades. After IPTW, the variables of patient characteristics was SMD ≤ 0.2 (Table.3), and there was a significant difference in anastomotic leakage (Odds Ratio (OR), 0.57; 95% Confidence Interval(CI), 0.34-0.98; p = 0.041). In addition, there was no significant difference in postoperative complications in grade II or higher (OR, 0.88; 95%CI, 0.65-1.19; p = 0.417) and grade III or higher (OR, 0.46; 95%CI, 0.29-0.74; p = 0.001) were significantly remarkable lower in powered circular stapling group.

CONCLUSION

In this IPTW comparison of patients undergoing rectal reconstructions, the ECP trial cohort had lower risks of several surgical complications AL and statistically signifcant lower rates of ileus/bowel obstruction, infection, and bleeding as Clavien-Dindo ≥ grade II and III as compared with for whom manual circular staplers were used.

Impact of powered circular stapler on anastomotic leak after anastomosis to the rectum: a propensity score matched study

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study is to assess the impact of Echelon Circular™ powered stapler (PCS) on left-sided colorectal anastomotic leaks and to compare results to conventional circular staplers (CCS).

METHODS

A single center cohort study was carried out on 552 consecutive patients, who underwent laparoscopic colorectal resection and anastomosis to the rectum between December 2017 and September 2022. Patients who underwent powered circular anastomosis to the rectum were matched to those who had a conventional stapled anastomosis using a propensity score matching. Main outcomes were anastomotic leak (AL) rate, anastomotic bleeding, and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

After adjusting cases with propensity score matching, two new groups of patients were generated: 145 patients in the PCS and 145 in the CCS. The two groups were homogeneous with respect to demographics and comorbidities on admission. Overall, AL occurred in 21 (7.3%) patients. No significant differences were observed with respect to AL (5.5% in PCS vs 9% in CCS; p = 0.66), fistula severity (p = 0.60) or reoperation rate (p = 0.65) in the two groups in study. A higher rate of anastomotic bleeding was observed in the CCS vs PCS (5.5% vs 0.7%, p = 0.03). At univariate analysis performed after propensity score matching, stapler diameter ≥ 31mm and age ≥ 70 years were the only variable significantly associated with anastomotic leak (p = 0.001 and p = 0.031; respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The powered circular stapler has no impact on AL, while it could affect bleeding rate at the anastomotic site.

Impact of a circular powered stapler on preventing anastomotic leakage in patients with left-sided colorectal cancer: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The powered circular stapler, which was developed with the aim of providing reliable and reproducible anastomosis, provides complete anastomosis, resulting in a reduced risk of anastomotic leakage. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of anastomotic leakage between a conventional manual circular stapler (MCS) and the ECHELON CIRCULAR™ Powered Stapler (ECPS) in patients with left-sided colorectal cancer who underwent anastomosis with the double stapling technique.

METHODS

A total of 187 patients with left-sided colorectal cancer who underwent anastomosis with the double stapling technique with a conventional MCS or the ECPS during surgery at Osaka City University Hospital between January 2016 and July 2022 were enrolled in this study.

RESULTS

The incidence of anastomotic leakage in the ECPS group was significantly lower than that in the MCS group (4.4% versus 14.3%, p = 0.048). Furthermore, even after propensity score matching, an association was found between the use of the ECPS and a reduced incidence of anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSION

The ECPS has the potential to help reduce the rate of anastomotic leakage in left-sided colorectal surgery.

Indirect comparison between powered and manual circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomoses: clinical and economic outcomes in China

Aims

This study aimed to examine the economic and clinical benefits of a new powered circular stapler for left-sided colorectal construction in China.

Methods

A decision analysis model was constructed for a cohort of adult patients who underwent left-sided colorectal anastomoses, using either the Echelon Circular Powered (ECP) stapler) or the conventional manual circular staplers (MCS). The complications rates and healthcare resource utilization in the ECP cohort were obtained from the single-arm ECP trial (NCT03326895). For the MCS cohort, retrospective data from 20 Chinese hospitals were analyzed. Listing prices were used to estimate the costs of the staplers in China. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to adjust for the imbalance between the two cohorts. Anastomotic leak rate, length of stay (LOS), 90-day readmission rate, and direct medical costs were used for the decision analysis model parameters. A budget impact analysis was conducted to compare the total hospitalization expenditure between ECP and manual circular staplers from the hospital’s perspective in China.

Results

Assuming 100 procedures per year, the anastomotic leak rate was 1.79 and 29.76 per 100 procedures in the ECP and MCS cohorts, respectively. LOS was 1,426.91 days in the ECP cohort, compared to 1,702.38 days in the MCS cohort. The 90-day readmission rate was also lower in the ECP cohort than the MCS cohort (19.10 vs. 26.19 per 100 procedures). For the 100 procedures, the annual total hospitalization costs for left-sided colorectal anastomosis were reduced from ¥7,152,251 using manual circular staplers to ¥6,919,306 using ECP. Despite a higher acquisition cost of ECP compared to the manual staplers (¥711,200 vs. ¥441,700), an annual saving of ¥232,945in the total cost resulted from lower rates of complications and shorter LOS. Sensitivity analyses presented consistent savings using ECP, and the ECP cost and cost of the index hospitalization with anastomotic leak were found the most influencing factors.

Conclusions

There were clinical and economic benefits of ECP, compared to manual circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomoses. Further direct comparative studies on the use of ECP in practice in Chinese hospital settings are warranted.

Impact of the novel powered circular stapler on risk of anastomotic leakage in colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Several risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) following colorectal surgery have been described. Improvement in devices for performing anastomosis is a modifiable factor that could reduce AL rates. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of technical improvements in the Echelon Circular™ powered stapler (ECPS) on the left-sided colorectal AL rate compared to current manual circular staplers (MCS).

METHODS

A cohort study was carried out on consecutive patients between January 2017 and February 2020 in whom left-sided stapled colorectal anastomosis above 5 cm from anal verge was performed. The primary end point was the risk of AL depending on the type of circular stapler used. The ECPS cases were matched to MCS cases by propensity score matching to obtain comparable groups of patients.

RESULTS

Two hundred seventy-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. A MCS anastomosis was performed in 218 patients and ECPS anastomosis in 61 (21.9%). Overall, AL was observed in 25 (9%) cases. Factors significantly associated with AL were American Society of Anesthesiologists score (p = 0.025) and type of circular stapler used (p = 0.021). After adjusting the cases with propensity score matching (119 cases MCS versus 60 ECPS), AL was observed in 14 (11.8%) patients in MCS group and in 1 (1.7%) patient in the ECPS group (p = 0.022). AL in the MCS group required reoperation in seven cases (5.8%), the remaining seven patients were treated conservatively. The patient in the ECSP group required an urgent Hartmann's procedure CONCLUSIONS: The ECPS device could have a positive impact by reducing AL rates in left-sided colorectal anastomosis. Multicenter controlled trials are needed for stronger evidence to change practice.