Risk of anastomotic leakage with two-row versus three-row manual circular staplers in colorectal anastomosis: a U.S. cohort study.

PURPOSES: To compare the risk of anastomotic leak (AL) between Ethicon manual circular staplers (two-row) versus Medtronic EEA™ circular stapler with Tri-Staple™ technology (three-row) and between Medtronic EEA™ circular stapler with DST™ Series technology (two-row) versus Tri-Staple™ technology. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in adult patients who underwent a left-sided colorectal surgery 2019-2022 in U.S. Premier Healthcare Database to assess the risk of AL within 30 days post-index procedure. The study devices were Ethicon manual circular staplers, Medtronic EEA™ circular stapler with DST™ technology, and Medtronic EEA™ circular stapler with Tri-Staple™ technology. RESULTS: Across 447 hospitals, the cumulative incidences (95% confidence intervals [CI]) of AL within 30 days post-index procedure were 7.78% (6.91-8.74%) among 8337 patients in the Ethicon manual circular stapler cohort, 7.54% (6.87-8.27%) among 7928 patients in the Medtronic EEA™ circular stapler with DST™ technology cohort, and 8.19% (6.57-10.07%) among 1306 patients in the Medtronic EEA™ circular stapler with Tri-Staple™ technology cohort. Comparative analyses revealed no difference comparing Ethicon manual circular staplers with Medtronic EEA™ circular staplers with Tri-Staple™ technology (risk ratio [RR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-1.01) or comparing Medtronic EEA™ circular staplers with DST™ technology to Tri-Staple™ technology (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.53-1.06). CONCLUSION: In this analysis of a large cohort of patients undergoing a left-sided colorectal surgery from a U.S. hospital database, the risk of AL observed with manual two-row circular staplers was similar to that seen with three-row devices. This study affirms the safety of manual two-row circular staplers in colorectal anastomosis.

Global Surgeon Opinion on the Impact of Surgical Access When Using Endocutters Across Specialties.

Background: Despite design enhancements in endocutters, key challenges related to limited surgical access and space can impact stapling and, potentially, surgical outcomes. Objectives: This study aimed to develop consensus statements outlining the clinical value of precise articulation and greater anatomical access in minimally invasive surgery performed by bariatric, colorectal, and thoracic surgeons. Methods: Colorectal, bariatric, and thoracic surgeons from Japan, the United States, United Kingdom, and France participated in a 2-round modified Delphi panel. Round 1 included binary, Likert scale-type, multiple-response, and open-ended questions. These were converted to affirmative statements for round 2 if sufficient agreement was reached. Consensus was set at a predefined threshold of at least 90% of panelists across all surgical specialties and regions selecting the same option ("agree" or "disagree") for the affirmative statements. Results: Of the 49 statements in the round 2 questionnaire, panelists (n=135) reached consensus that (1) tissue slippage outside stapler jaws can occur due to limited access and space; (2) greater jaw aperture could help to manipulate thick or fragile tissue more easily; (3) articulation of an endocutter is clinically important in laparoscopic surgeries; (4) improved access to hard-to-reach targets and in limited space would improve safety; and (5) an endocutter with improved access through greater articulation would become common use. Discussion: By understanding user-specific challenges and needs from both specialty- and region-wide perspectives, endoscopic stapling devices can continue to be refined. In this study, improved articulation and greater jaw aperture were the key design features examined. Improved articulation and greater jaw aperture were key stapler design features identified in this study that may mitigate the risk of instrument clashes and intraoperative complications such as anastomotic leaks. Conclusions: This study gained insights into surgeons' perspective across a variety of specialties and from 3 distinct geographies. Participating surgeons reached consensus that an endocutter with greater jaw aperture and articulation may improve surgical access and has potential to improve surgical outcomes.

Feasibility and Efficacy of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation for the Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Post-Sleeve Gastrectomy for Obesity.

BACKGROUND: Patients with medically intractable GERD after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) have limited surgical options. Fundoplication is difficult post-LSG. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass may be used as a conversion procedure but is more invasive with potential for serious complications. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is a less invasive GERD treatment alternative. The objective of this study was to assess safety and efficacy outcomes of MSA after LSG. METHODS: The primary outcome of this observational, multicenter, single-arm prospective study was the rate of serious device and/or procedure-related adverse events (AEs). The efficacy of the LINX device was measured comparing baseline to 12-month post-implant reductions in distal acid exposure, GERD-HRQL score, and average daily PPI usage. RESULTS: Thirty subjects who underwent MSA implantation were followed 12 months post-implant. No unanticipated adverse device effects were observed. There were two adverse events deemed serious (dysphagia, pain, 6.7%) which resolved without sequelae. GERD-HRQL scores showed significant improvement (80.8%, P < 0.001), and reduction in daily PPI usage was seen (95.8%, P < 0.001). Forty-four percent of subjects demonstrated normalization or > = 50% reduction of total distal acid exposure time (baseline 16.2%, 12 months 11%; P = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Post-LSG, MSA showed an overall improvement of GERD symptoms, and reduction in PPI use with explants within anticipated range along with improvement in distal esophageal acid exposure time.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Gripping Surface Technology Staple Reloads versus Standard Staple Reloads Used with Manual Linear Surgical Staplers.

Purpose: Linear surgical staplers reduce rates of surgical adverse events (bleeding, leaks, infections) compared to manual sutures thereby reducing patient risks, surgeon workflow disruption, and healthcare costs. However, further improvements are needed. Ethicon Gripping Surface Technology (GST) reloads, tested and approved by regulatory authorities in combination with powered staplers, may reduce surgical risks through improved tissue grip. While manual staplers are used in some regions due to affordability, clinical data on GST reloads used with manual staplers are unavailable. This study compared surgical adverse event rates of manual staplers with GST vs standard reloads. These data may be used for label changes in China and Latin America. Patients and Methods: Patients undergoing general or thoracic surgery between October 1, 2015 and August 31, 2021 using ECHELON FLEX™ manual staplers with GST or standard reloads were identified from the Premier Healthcare Database. GST reloads were compared to standard reloads for non-inferiority in bleeding and anastomotic leak for general surgery. Secondary outcomes included sepsis for general surgery, and bleeding and prolonged air leak for thoracic surgery. Covariate balancing was performed using stable balancing weights. Results: The general and thoracic surgery cohorts contained 4571 (GST: 2780; standard: 1791) and 814 (GST: 514; standard: 300) patients, respectively. GST reloads were non-inferior to standard reloads for bleeding and anastomotic leak (adjusted cumulative incidence ratio: 1.02 [90% CI: 0.71, 1.45] and 1.03 [90% CI: 0.72, 1.46], respectively) for general surgery. Compared with standard reloads, GST reloads had a similar incidence of sepsis (2.2% vs 2.1%) for general surgery and lower incidences of bleeding (9.5% vs 16.0%) and prolonged air leak (12.6% vs 14.0%,) for thoracic surgery. Conclusion: GST reloads, compared to standard reloads, used with ECHELON FLEX™ manual staplers had comparable perioperative bleeding and anastomotic leak for general surgery, and lower incidences of safety events for thoracic surgery.

Improving Performance and Access to Difficult-to-Reach Anatomy with a Powered Articulating Stapler.

Background: Modern surgical staplers should provide precise placement and transection, especially in tight spaces and on thick tissue. Ideally, a stapler would move to accommodate variations in the tissue and anatomy instead of having to move the tissue around to fit the stapler. This study was undertaken to evaluate the performance characteristics of the new Echelon 3000 Stapler (ECH3). Use of the ECH3 was compared to another marketed stapler, including tests for access, seal strength, staple formation in thick tissue, and end effector stability. Methods: Pelvic anatomy measurements were used to construct a virtual model of a Low Anterior Resection (LAR). Monte Carlo simulations were performed on the staplers to compare the probability of completing a transection with one or two firings. Using water infusion of stapled porcine ileum, pressure at first leak and percentage of leaks at critical pressures were measured. Rate of malformed staples was measured in thick tissue. End effector stability while firing and under moderate pressure were compared between staplers. After use, surgeons were surveyed on the functionality of the device. Results: ECH3 had a markedly higher probability of completing an LAR transection in one or two firings than the comparator stapler. Median initial leak pressure of stapled ileum was significantly higher, and rate of leaks was lower at 40 and 50 mmHg. ECH3 had fewer malformed staples for both 3.3- and 4.0-mm thick tissue. The end effector exhibited less angular movement during firing, and less deflection under a moderate load. Surgeons agreed the ECH3 provided precise placement and easy one-handed operation. Conclusion: The Echelon 3000 Stapler demonstrated improved access capability, tighter seals, fewer malformed staples, and greater end effector stability. These advantages were recognized by surgeons who evaluated the use of the device preclinically.

The Viscoelastic Behavior of Soft Tissues Must be Accounted for in Stapler Design and Surgeon Technique.

BACKGROUND: Since its adoption as a surgical technique over a half-century ago, stapling has continually undergone improvements, both in the devices used and in our understanding of tissue mechanics. To best design and use stapling devices, it is beneficial to have an intimate knowledge of the response of tissue to compression and stapling dynamics. This paper provides the relevant background in the field of biomechanics, and in particular addresses the viscoelastic behavior of soft tissues under compression. Biomechanics of Stapling: The change in shape of a solid, or strain, is related to the load applied, or stress. Biological tissues are known to have non-linear relationships between stress and strain, and generally the relationships are anisotropic (dependent upon direction). Further complicating matters, there is typically a time-dependency to the relationship for compression and recovery, resulting in viscoelastic behavior. Hence both the amount and rate of compressive force applied can be expected to impact the outcome of stapling. DISCUSSION: The growth of the laparoscopic use of staples has increased the difficulty of device design, as precise control of compression is problematic in extended length staplers. Progressive firing along the cartridge and multi-stage compression have both been found to be beneficial in providing the uniform force needed to produce well-formed staples. Such technical advances can reduce stresses within the stapler, preventing deformation of the stapler arm and undesirable strain in the tissue. Current research includes understanding the effects of changing the rate of compression on staple formation with the hope that further improvements can be achieved in this ever-fruitful method of tissue apposition.

Economic Analysis of Leak Complications in Anastomoses Performed with Powered versus Manual Circular Staplers in Left-Sided Colorectal Resections: A US-Based Cost Analysis.

PURPOSE: To estimate the cost impact of using the ECHELON CIRCULAR™ Powered Stapler (ECP) compared with manual circular staplers (standard of care, SOC) among patients undergoing colectomy procedures that involve left-sided anastomosis. METHODS: A US hospital-based budget impact model was developed to estimate the impact of ECP in reducing the surgical complication of anastomotic leak. The incremental acquisition cost of ECP vs SOC was compared to the net potential savings from reduced complication costs. The model was based on complication rates from a recently published matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) that compared clinical and healthcare utilization outcomes of patients using ECP with those of a propensity score-matched retrospective SOC control cohort from a real-world clinical practice population. The model assessed total cost, average length of stay (LOS), proportion of patients with a non-home discharge, and all-cause readmission. Deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted to evaluate the robustness of the model assumptions and inputs. RESULTS: Despite a higher device cost of $412 for ECP compared with $298 for a manual stapler, annual savings due to avoided complications with ECP was $53,987 for anastomotic leak, assuming 100 procedures per year with each type of circular stapler. ECP also helped to avoid 27 LOS days, 0.38 readmissions and 0.22 non-home discharges. Sensitivity analyses around potential drivers of costs established the robustness of economic savings with the use of ECP - with annual savings being most impacted by the probability of anastomotic leak complication in the DSA. CONCLUSION: This model demonstrates that among patients undergoing left-sided colectomy procedures, the incremental cost of using the ECHELON CIRCULAR™ Powered Stapler instead of a manual circular stapler was offset by the savings from lowered incidence and cost of management of anastomotic leaks in the hospital setting.