Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37600864›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches2023

The Esophagogastric Anastomosis: The Importance of Anchoring Sutures in Reducing Anastomotic Leak Rates.

Thomas N Walsh

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Thomas N WalshFrom the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland Department of Surgery, Connolly Hospital Blanchardstown, Dublin, Ireland.
Creative Commons · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The incidence of anastomotic leakage in gastrointestinal surgery is highest after esophagogastric anastomosis, with leakage rates of 10% to 38% still being reported, but little consensus as to cause or corrective. The role of anastomotic tension from a series of physiological forces acting on the anastomosis from the moment of recovery from anesthesia may be underestimated. It was hypothesized that anchoring the conduit in the mediastinum would provide the greatest protection during the vulnerable healing phase. Patients and Methods: A prospectively maintained database was interrogated for anastomotic leakage following the introduction of an anastomotic technique employing anchoring sutures where the gastric conduit was secured to the mediastinal pleura with 3 obliquely inserted load-bearing sutures. A contrast study was performed between days 5 and 7 and all intrahospital mortalities underwent autopsy. Clinical, radiological, and autopsy leaks were recorded. Results: Of 146 intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomoses in 144 patients, 81 (55%) of which were stapled, there was 1 clinical leak and 1 patient with an aortoenteric fistula, considered at autopsy to be possibly due to an anastomotic leak, to give an anastomotic leak rate of 2 in 146 (1.37%). Conclusion: The low anastomotic leak rate in this series is potentially due to the protective effect of anchoring sutures, the chief difference from an otherwise standard anastomotic technique. These sutures protect the anastomosis from a series of distracting forces during the most vulnerable phase of healing. It is intuitive that the absence of tension would also reduce any risk posed by a minor impairment of blood supply or any imperfection of the technique.

Identifiers

PMID37600864
PMCPMC10431275
OpenAlexW4318766619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.