0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Review Article |

Systematic Review of the Technique of Colorectal Anastomosis FREE

Juliette C. Slieker, MD; Freek Daams, MD; Irene M. Mulder, MD; Johannes Jeekel, MD, PhD; Johan F. Lange, MD, PhD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Departments of Surgery (Drs Slieker, Daams, Mulder, and Lange) and Neuroscience (Dr Jeekel), Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.


JAMA Surg. 2013;148(2):190-201. doi:10.1001/2013.jamasurg.33.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Many different techniques of colorectal anastomosis have been described in search of the technique with the lowest incidence of anastomotic leak. A systematic review of leak rates of techniques of hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis was conducted to provide a guideline for surgical residents and promote standardization of its technique. Clinical and experimental articles on colorectal anastomotic techniques and anastomotic healing published in the past 4 decades were searched. We included evidence on suture material, suture format, single- vs double-layer sutures, interrupted vs continuous sutures, hand-sewn vs stapled and compression colorectal anastomosis, and anastomotic configuration. In total, 3 meta-analyses, 26 randomized controlled trials, 11 nonrandomized comparative studies, 20 cohort studies, and 57 experimental studies were found. Results show that, for many aspects of the hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis technique, evidence is lacking. A single-layer continuous technique using inverting sutures with slowly absorbable monofilament material seems preferable. However, in contrast to stapled and compression colorectal anastomoses, the technique for hand-sewn colorectal anastomoses is nonstandardized with regard to intersuture distance, suture distance to the anastomotic edge, and tension on the suture. We believe detailed documentation of the anastomotic technique of all colorectal operations is needed to determine the role of the hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis.

Figures in this Article

Construction of a colorectal anastomosis is a hallmark of surgical training. However, although surgical residents can refer to key publications with evidence-based conclusions for many topics, mere imitation of an experienced surgeon traditionally is considered the basic source for the technique of hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis. The large variety of anastomotic techniques is one of the main difficulties in the interpretation of the literature. Anastomotic leak (AL) following colorectal resection is a major problem of surgical care, with an incidence between 3% and 19%.14 Although accurate prediction of risk is impossible, certain factors are known to contribute to AL, including surgeon-related factors (eg, increased incidence of AL in a colorectal anastomosis constructed after hours5 and the positive role of specialization in reducing the complications of colorectal surgery6) and patient-related risk factors (eg, the inverse relationship between the height of the colorectal anastomosis from the anal verge and the leak rate712). Decades of research have resulted in many studies investigating different techniques for constructing colorectal anastomosis in search of the safest method. Appreciating the conclusions from this extensive research is essential for the quality of colorectal surgery and for the resident being trained in colorectal surgery. Our aims were to perform a systematic review of all aspects of the technique of hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis and compare hand-sewn with mechanical colorectal anastomosis to provide a guideline for residents and promote standardization of the technique.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for studies published between January 1, 1970, and February 1, 2011, using the key words presented in the eFigure. The search was restricted to articles published in English, Dutch, and French. References in the selected publications were searched for additional studies.

STUDY SELECTION

Clinical as well as experimental studies were selected to address several aspects of the technique of hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis. These included:

  1. suture material,

  2. suture format (size of suture bites, in-between distance of bites, suture tension, configuration of the bite, and inverting vs everting sutures),

  3. single- vs double-layer colorectal anastomosis,

  4. interrupted vs continuous sutures,

  5. hand-sewn vs stapled colorectal anastomosis,

  6. hand-sewn vs compression colorectal anastomosis, and

  7. configuration of colorectal anastomosis (end-to-end [ETE], end-to-side, side-to-end, side-to-side, length of the side-limb, and length of the enterotomy).

INCLUSION CRITERIA FOR CLINICAL STUDIES

Only clinical studies comparing 2 or more colorectal anastomotic techniques with regard to clinical AL were considered relevant. When only 1 comparative study was available on a particular subject, clinical cohort studies were added to the selection. Results were analyzed only if the study groups and results were clearly described with proper statistical analysis.

INCLUSION CRITERIA FOR EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES

Experimental studies were selected when comparing 2 or more colorectal anastomotic techniques using objective measurements for anastomotic healing: AL, anastomotic bursting pressure (ABP), anastomotic breaking strength, histologic results, or collagen concentration.

When 2 studies were reported by the same institution, either the better quality study or the most recent publication was included. As with clinical studies, results were analyzed only if the study groups and results were clearly described with proper statistical analysis. However, the lack of statistical analysis of histologic findings in experimental studies was accepted.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Because the healing of small-bowel anastomoses is different and the incidence of AL is lower compared with large-bowel anastomoses, studies including both procedures without differentiating the results and statistical analysis were excluded. Ileocolic anastomoses after right hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection represent healing of the colon and were therefore included. Studies reporting radiologic AL without distinction of clinical AL were excluded, as were studies reporting only on emergency operations, children, and colo-anal anastomosis or pouches. Results of experimental studies measured directly after the construction of colorectal anastomosis were not taken into account because these do not reflect anastomotic healing.

DATA EXTRACTION FOR CLINICAL STUDIES

  • Two physicians (J.C.S. and F.D.) entered data in a database following standard protocols. Seven factors were considered for clinical studies. These included:

    first author and year of publication,

    level of evidence (following the Centre of Evidence Based Medicine, University of Oxford),

    study design,

    number of patients,

    location of anastomosis in the gastrointestinal tract,

    definition of outcome by the authors (AL, clinical AL, and radiologic AL), and

    results and statistical analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION FOR EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES

  • Six factors were considered for experimental studies. These included:

    first author and year of publication,

    study design,

    number of animals per group,

    species,

    outcome factors for anastomotic healing (AL, ABP, breaking strength, histologic results, or collagen concentration), and

    results.

The literature search identified 6168 articles; 1443 articles remained after duplicates were removed. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) flowchart presented in the Figure shows the selection of studies: 117 were included in the systematic review. Included studies and their characteristics are listed in Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, together with all results of outcome measures. The results per research question are summarized herein.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) flowchart: selection of relevant studies.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Included Studies on Suture Material
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Included Studies on Suture Format
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Included Studies on Single- vs Double-Layer Colorectal Anastomosisa
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Included Studies on Interrupted vs Continuous Sutures
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 5. Included Studies on Hand-Sewn vs Stapled Colorectal Anastomosis
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 6. Included Studies on Hand-Sewn vs Compression Colorectal Anastomosis
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 7. Included Studies on Configuration
SUTURE MATERIAL

Decades ago, several materials, such as silk, linen, catgut, polyglactin 910, and nylon, were commonly used for colorectal anastomosis. Today most gastrointestinal anastomoses, including colorectal anastomosis, are constructed with polydioxanone sutures. Ten experimental studies1322 were included. Results show that absorbable sutures compared with nonabsorbable or slowly absorbable sutures cause more tissue reaction1315; one of these studies13 showed that absorbable sutures dissolve too rapidly, influencing anastomotic strength. Multifilament compared with monofilament sutures cause more tissue damage and easier adherence of material within the interstices of multifilament sutures,1619 providing a basis for infection.121 Surprisingly, experimental studies on the healing of colorectal anastomosis constructed with polydioxanone sutures are scarce; only 2 studies17,20 were included, finding equal ABP and histologic characteristics between polydioxanone and polyglycolic acid. Noncomparative experimental studies121124 that did not meet the inclusion criteria for the present systematic review have shown that polydioxanone sutures possess all aspects considered important: monofilament, little histologic reaction, slowly absorbable with long preservation of strength, and low adherence of bacteria to the material.

New possibilities for the use of sutures coated with mesenchymal stem cells and doxycycline were explored in 2 experimental studies with promising, but not yet convincing, results.21,22 Two included randomized controlled trials (RCTs)23,24 on suture material failed to achieve a unanimous conclusion because of the small number of patients included and the different suture materials tested that are rarely used today.

In conclusion, on the basis of experimental studies, nonabsorbable or slowly absorbable monofilament sutures seem to be the first choice for colorectal anastomosis. However, there is no level 1 evidence to confirm this hypothesis.

SUTURE FORMAT
Size of Suture Bites

Since Lembert125 described the construction of intestinal anastomoses in dogs using suture bites with 5-mm distance to the cut edge nearly 2 centuries ago, this aspect seems to have become less clear in surgical literature. One experimental study25 was found for this systematic review that investigated the difference in anastomotic strength in rats with sutures placed between 3 mm and 1.5 mm from the cut edges. Results showed lower breaking strength for small bites, measured at day 2. One RCT by Greenall et al26 reporting on the distance of the suture to the wound edge matched the inclusion criteria. They randomly allocated patients to have bowel sutures placed either 5 or 10 mm from the cut edges, with no significant differences in AL. Because it is not possible to extrapolate the distances used in a rat model to the clinical situation, we can only conclude from one level 1b RCT that distances of 5 and 10 mm from the cut edge will probably give adequate results.

In-between Distance of Bites

Lembert described in 1826125 an in-between distance of approximately 1 cm between sutures. One experimental study conducted by Waninger et al27 investigating the distance between sutures in rats was included in our review. It concluded that a small distance between sutures (1.5 mm) improves apposition compared with a larger distance (2.5 mm). Neither clinical comparative studies nor cohort studies were found. Again, distances in a rat model are difficult to extrapolate to the patient. Because clinical studies on this topic are lacking, no precise maxim can be distilled from the literature.

Suture Tension

In routine clinical practice, 2 undefined schools of thought seem to exist: the first believes that sutures should be tightened to prevent dehiscence of the anastomosis, and the second considers that sutures should be applied more loosely, allowing maximal perfusion of the cut edges. Only one rat study27 investigated this, with moderate tension giving the best histologic and microangiographic results. Whether tension on knots could influence the incidence of AL in a clinical setting has not been investigated for interrupted or continuous suturing. On the basis of the literature evaluated in the present review, nothing can be concluded on the proper tension on the thread or the knot.

Configuration of the Bite

Historically, all opinion leaders proposed their own configuration of gastrointestinal sutures. Anatomic apposition of all layers promoting primary healing was thought to be important. These days, most surgeons use a simple through-all-layers technique. From ex vivo studies,126,127 it is known that sutures through the mucosal layer do not contribute to anastomotic strength.

The present review included 2 experimental studies on rat colon, comparing histologic results of full-thickness sutures with those of serosubmucosal sutures. Houdart et al28 found no significant histologic differences, but Krasniqi et al29 found better histologic results for full-thickness sutures with equal anastomotic strength. No comparative clinical studies were found on the configuration of the bite. Because of this lack of evidence, we have included cohort studies,3034 reporting low rates of AL for both serosubmucosal and full-thickness suture formats (AL, 0%-4.4%).

We can only conclude, using scarce level 2b evidence from the cohort studies evaluated, that both serosubmucosal and full-thickness sutures seem to provide low rates of AL. It is clear that the configuration of the suture bite is considered of little interest in studies regarding AL.

Inverting vs Everting Sutures

Since the publication of Lembert,125 surgeons generally have advocated an inverting technique of gastrointestinal anastomosis because it is believed that protruding mucosa will lead to AL. However, in the 1960s, 2 clinical studies128,129 showed good healing of everting anastomoses with a low incidence of AL. Between 1960 and 1970, these 2 noncomparative studies were followed by many experimental publications comparing everting with inverting techniques. They failed to achieve a unanimous conclusion on anastomotic healing; however, they were consistent in showing that everting anastomoses cause more adhesions but less stenosis.3537,130134 All 3 experimental studies3537 published after 1970 included in the present review seem to show improved anastomotic healing for inverted anastomoses. The only clinical study matching the inclusion criteria was an RCT38 showing a 5-fold increased incidence of AL in patients receiving an everting colorectal anastomosis compared with those receiving an inverting colorectal anastomosis. No cohort studies matching our inclusion criteria were found. Therefore, on the basis of available experimental studies and a level 1b clinical study, there seems to be an advantage of inverting over everting colorectal anastomosis; nonetheless, level 1a evidence is lacking.

SINGLE- VS DOUBLE-LAYER COLORECTAL ANASTOMOSIS

The technique developed by Lembert125 and later modified by Czerny135 is based on a double-layer inverting anastomotic technique. In the 19th and the greater part of the 20th centuries, this was the criterion standard for gastrointestinal anastomosis; in the second half of the 20th century, however, the single-layer anastomosis regained attention through the favorable results obtained by Halstead,136 Gambee,137 and Gambee et al.138 The 13 included experimental studies36,3950 came to the same conclusion: double-layer anastomoses are inferior to single-layer anastomoses because of increased inflammation and diminished circulation. One RCT51 matched the inclusion criteria, showing no significant differences in AL between single- and double-layer colorectal anastomosis in 92 patients. This RCT conducted a subgroup analysis of 25 low colorectal anastomoses, finding a significantly higher incidence of AL in colorectal anastomosis created with the double-layer technique. None of the 3 nonrandomized comparative studies47,52,53 included in this review found a significant difference in AL between the 2 techniques. In conclusion, these results add to the knowledge that single-layer anastomoses take significantly less time to construct and are less costly139 and are in favor of single anastomoses on the basis of level 1b evidence.

INTERRUPTED VS CONTINUOUS SUTURES

The question on whether to use interrupted or continuous sutures arose when single-layer anastomoses became common practice. Six experimental studies were included, showing equivocal results: better serosal apposition54 and blood flow in continuous sutures,55 with equal results on ABP and histologic examination.28,56,57,73 Randomized controlled trials investigating interrupted and continuous sutures for colorectal anastomosis are lacking; therefore, only 1 small, nonrandomized, comparative clinical study finding no significant differences was included,58 and noncomparative cohort studies were selected on continuous and interrupted suturing, finding equally low leak rates.31,5972 Clinical and experimental studies have not concluded that one technique is superior to the other, and a high level of evidence is lacking (limited here to level 2b); however, from a technical and time-consuming point of view, a continuous suture is preferable over interrupted sutures for creating colorectal anastomosis.

HAND-SEWN VS STAPLED COLORECTAL ANASTOMOSIS

After the introduction of stapled colorectal anastomosis in the 1980s, both techniques have become prevalent, without defined indications but for the lower rectal anastomoses. Most surgeons apply both techniques, although often with a personal preference.

Thirteen RCTs7486 and 3 meta-analyses8789 were included in the present review. Lustosa et al87 published a Cochrane meta-analysis of 9 RCTs conducted between 1981 and 1991. In this group of 1233 patients, there was no significant difference in mortality, AL, strictures, or reoperation between stapled and hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis. An earlier meta-analysis,88 conducted in 1998, combined 13 RCTs concerning patients with colorectal anastomosis and found similar results: no significant differences in AL or mortality. The Cochrane review conducted by Choy et al89 included studies on colorectal anastomosis after right hemicolectomy. This review showed significantly less overall AL in the stapled group; however, when clinical AL was used as the only outcome measure, this difference did not reach statistical significance. An interesting subgroup analysis made by Friend et al82 found more AL in hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis when the anastomoses performed by residents were analyzed separately. Their conclusion was that stapling seems to have an advantage in less-experienced hands. Of 7 included nonrandomized cohort studies included in this review, 5 found no superiority of one technique.100104 Two studies found significantly more AL in stapled compared with hand-sewn anastomoses.98,99 However, one of these had significantly more patients with corticosteroids in the stapled group,99 while the other included 505 hand-sewn compared with 28 stapled colorectal anastomoses in 20 years.98 Thirteen experimental studies41,45,50,9097,105,106 included herein found results approximately similar to those in the clinical setting: no significant differences in AL, with equal or higher ABP in stapled colorectal anastomosis.

In conclusion, the field of hand-sewn vs stapled colorectal anastomosis has been well studied. On the basis of level 1a evidence, no superiority of stapled over hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis exists.

HAND-SEWN VS COMPRESSION COLORECTAL ANASTOMOSIS

Denans described the first technique to create intestinal anastomoses by compression in 1827,140 followed by other devices, such as the Murphy button, in 1892.141 Today the biofragmentable anastomotic ring, made of absorbable polyglycolic acid, is used most often. Four included experimental studies107110 showed that compression colorectal anastomosis leads to acceptable healing and strength; 6 included RCTs111116 provide equivalent conclusions, finding no significant differences between hand-sewn and compression colorectal anastomosis. Also, noncomparative clinical cohort studies142145 including up to 1360 patients have reported incidences of AL between 0.7% and 5%. Although few gastrointestinal surgeons routinely use compression colorectal anastomosis, it seems a safe method. On the basis of 6 level 1b studies, no superiority of compression over hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis exists when comparing leak rates.

CONFIGURATION OF COLORECTAL ANASTOMOSIS

Studies regarding the configuration of the afferent and efferent ileal, colonic, or rectal loops are heterogeneous in patient selection and configuration and often concentrate on stapled pouches for very low anastomoses with outcome variables other than AL. Only 2 experimental studies matched the inclusion criteria; one study117 found no significant difference in blood flow between ETE or side-to-side anastomosis after rectal resection in pigs, and the other118 found better blood flow in ETE compared with side-to-end anastomosis after rectal resection in dogs. The included RCTs are also scarce: one119 on ETE vs end-to-side found more AL in ETE, and the other120 on the optimum side limb for side-to-end colorectal anastomosis found no significant difference between 3- and 6-cm sized limbs. No studies investigating the ideal length of the enterotomy were identified.

It is difficult to draw a conclusion from this small number of studies; there is one level 1b study showing a lower incidence of AL with end-to-side colorectal anastomosis and one level 1b study indicating that a 3-cm or a 6-cm side limb does not affect the incidence of AL.

In the clinical setting, healing of colorectal anastomosis is obscured from direct postoperative inspection. When AL occurs, diagnosis can be made only after the patient has become ill, making it a feared complication with high morbidity and mortality.1,4,146148 This systematic review of all aspects of hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis and the comparison of hand-sewn with mechanical anastomosis provides an overview of the existing colorectal anastomotic techniques combined with the available scientific evidence on anastomotic healing. Evaluation of colorectal anastomosis with clinical AL as the outcome measure and proper statistics produced very little level 1 evidence for all aspects of hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis. Nevertheless, we can formulate a conclusion using experimental results combined with clinical results for many aspects: the single-layer continuous suture technique by an inverting technique with slowly absorbable monofilament material seems preferable on the basis of level 1b evidence. However, for the other aspects of the technique, such as how far to place the suture from the anastomotic edge, the intersuture distance in relationship to the distance to the edge, which layers to include in the bite, how high the tension on the suture should be, and through what configuration the anastomosis should be made, surgeons probably rely on their teachers and instinct rather than on scientific evidence.

Large cohort studies that are available, describing low rates of AL for the used anastomotic technique, might indicate that dedicated, high-volume colorectal surgery has a role in lowering the incidence of AL because of a surgeon's familiarity with a certain technique.

Considering mechanical colorectal anastomosis, level 1a evidence indicates that stapling and hand-sewn anastomoses give equal results with regard to clinical AL, and level 1b evidence determines that compression and hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis have similar AL rates. In contrast to all possible variations that exist when sewing an anastomosis by hand, the technique of a stapled technique is much more uniform in the hands of surgeons. This could lead to standardizing colorectal anastomosis and prevent the nonscientific practice of the preferences of individual surgeons from being handed down from teacher to student without documentation of their exact properties and incidence of AL.

We can conclude from this review that, as of now, hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis is constructed following a largely undefined technique. The circumstances of RCTs do not reflect daily practice; therefore, routine, detailed documentation of anastomotic technique of all colorectal operations will be instrumental in formulating a definitive conclusion on the role of the unstandardized hand-sewn colorectal anastomosis.

Correspondence: Juliette C. Slieker, MD, Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Laboratory of Experimental Surgery, Room Ee-173, Postbus 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands (juliette_slieker@hotmail.com).

Accepted for Publication: June 25, 2012.

Author Contributions:Study concept and design: Slieker, Daams, Jeekel, and Lange. Acquisition of data: Slieker and Daams. Analysis and interpretation of data: Slieker, Daams, Mulder, Jeekel, and Lange. Drafting of the manuscript: Slieker, Daams, and Jeekel. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Slieker, Daams, Mulder, Jeekel, and Lange. Statistical analysis: Slieker. Obtained funding: Jeekel. Administrative, technical, and material support: Mulder and Jeekel. Study supervision: Jeekel and Lange.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

This article was corrected for missing online-only text on February 20th, 2013.

Hyman N, Manchester TL, Osler T, Burns B, Cataldo PA. Anastomotic leaks after intestinal anastomosis: it's later than you think.  Ann Surg. 2007;245(2):254-258
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Matthiessen P, Hallböök O, Rutegård J, Simert G, Sjödahl R. Defunctioning stoma reduces symptomatic anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection of the rectum for cancer: a randomized multicenter trial.  Ann Surg. 2007;246(2):207-214
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Alves A, Panis Y, Trancart D, Regimbeau JM, Pocard M, Valleur P. Factors associated with clinically significant anastomotic leakage after large bowel resection: multivariate analysis of 707 patients.  World J Surg. 2002;26(4):499-502
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Peeters KC, Tollenaar RA, Marijnen CA,  et al; Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group.  Risk factors for anastomotic failure after total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer.  Br J Surg. 2005;92(2):211-216
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Komen N, Dijk JW, Lalmahomed Z,  et al.  After-hours colorectal surgery: a risk factor for anastomotic leakage.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 2009;24(7):789-795
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Zorcolo L, Covotta L, Carlomagno N, Bartolo DC. Toward lowering morbidity, mortality, and stoma formation in emergency colorectal surgery: the role of specialization.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2003;46(11):1461-1468
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yeh CY, Changchien CR, Wang JY,  et al.  Pelvic drainage and other risk factors for leakage after elective anterior resection in rectal cancer patients: a prospective study of 978 patients.  Ann Surg. 2005;241(1):9-13
PubMed
Matthiessen P, Hallböök O, Andersson M, Rutegård J, Sjödahl R. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection of the rectum.  Colorectal Dis. 2004;6(6):462-469
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Rullier E, Laurent C, Garrelon JL, Michel P, Saric J, Parneix M. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after resection of rectal cancer.  Br J Surg. 1998;85(3):355-358
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Vignali A, Fazio VW, Lavery IC,  et al.  Factors associated with the occurrence of leaks in stapled rectal anastomoses: a review of 1,014 patients.  J Am Coll Surg. 1997;185(2):105-113
PubMed
Mann B, Kleinschmidt S, Stremmel W. Prospective study of hand-sutured anastomosis after colorectal resection.  Br J Surg. 1996;83(1):29-31
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Detry RJ, Kartheuser A, Delriviere L, Saba J, Kestens PJ. Use of the circular stapler in 1000 consecutive colorectal anastomoses: experience of one surgical team.  Surgery. 1995;117(2):140-145
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hastings JC, Winkle WV, Barker E, Hines D, Nichols W. Effect of suture materials on healing wounds of the stomach and colon.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1975;140(5):701-707
PubMed
Letwin ER. Evaluation of polyglycolic acid sutures in colon anastomoses.  Can J Surg. 1975;18(1):30-32
PubMed
Orringer MB, Appleman HD, Argenta L, Bove E, Cimmino V. Polypropylene suture in esophageal and gastrointestinal operations.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1977;144(1):67-70
PubMed
Deveney KE, Way LW. Effect of different absorbable sutures on healing of gastrointestinal anastomoses.  Am J Surg. 1977;133(1):86-94
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Foresman PA, Edlich RF, Rodeheaver GT. The effect of new monofilament absorbable sutures on the healing of musculoaponeurotic incisions, gastrotomies, and colonic anastomoses.  Arch Surg. 1989;124(6):708-710
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lord MG, Broughton AC, Williams HT. A morphologic study on the effect of suturing the submucosa of the large intestine.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1978;146(2):211-216
PubMed
Munday C, McGinn FP. A comparison of polyglycolic acid and catgut sutures in rat colonic anastomoses.  Br J Surg. 1976;63(11):870-872
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Andersen E, Søndenaa K, Holter J. A comparative study of polydioxanone (PDS) and polyglactin 910 (Vicryl) in colonic anastomoses in rats.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 1989;4(4):251-254
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pascual I, de Miguel GF, Gómez-Pinedo UA, de Miguel F, Arranz MG, García-Olmo D. Adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells in biosutures do not improve healing of experimental colonic anastomoses.  Br J Surg. 2008;95(9):1180-1184
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pasternak B, Rehn M, Andersen L,  et al.  Doxycycline-coated sutures improve mechanical strength of intestinal anastomoses.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008;23(3):271-276
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Clark CG, Wyllie JH, Haggie SJ, Renton P. Comparison of catgut and polyglycolic acid sutures in colonic anastomoses.  World J Surg. 1977;1(4):501-505
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gillatt DA, Corfield AP, May RE, Bartolo DC, Leaper DJ. Polydioxanone suture in the gastrointestinal tract.  Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1987;69(2):54-56
PubMed
Högström H, Haglund U, Zederfeldt B. Suture technique and early breaking strength of intestinal anastomoses and laparotomy wounds.  Acta Chir Scand. 1985;151(5):441-443
PubMed
Greenall MJ, Evans M, Pollock AV. Influence of depth of suture bite on integrity of single-layer large-bowel anastomoses: controlled trial.  J R Soc Med. 1979;72(5):351-356
PubMed
Waninger J, Kauffmann GW, Shah IA, Farthmann EH. Influence of the distance between interrupted sutures and the tension of sutures on the healing of experimental colonic anastomoses.  Am J Surg. 1992;163(3):319-323
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Houdart R, Lavergne A, Galian A, Hautefeuille P. Anatomo-pathological evolution of single-layer end-to-end digestive anastomoses: a study of 210 colonic anastomoses in rats from the 2nd to the 180th day.  Gastroenterol Clin Biol. 1983;7(5):465-473
PubMed
Krasniqi A, Gashi-Luci L, Krasniqi S,  et al.  A comparison of three single layer anastomotic techniques in the colon of the rat.  Int J Surg. 2009;7(1):31-35
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Leslie A, Steele RJ. The interrupted serosubmucosal anastomosis—still the gold standard.  Colorectal Dis. 2003;5(4):362-366
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pye G, Steele RJ. Anastomoses involving the colon and rectum: an 8-year experience.  J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1996;41(2):95-96
PubMed
Carty NJ, Keating J, Campbell J, Karanjia N, Heald RJ. Prospective audit of an extramucosal technique for intestinal anastomosis.  Br J Surg. 1991;78(12):1439-1441
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lafreniere R, Ketcham AS. A single layer open anastomosis for all intestinal structures.  Am J Surg. 1985;149(6):797-798
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Motson RW, Bolwell JS, Heath AL, Makin CA, Al Sawaf H. One-layer colonic anastomosis with polyglycolic acid (Dexon) suture: a 3-year prospective audit.  Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1984;66(1):19-21
PubMed
Ortiz H, Azpeitia D, Casalots J, Sitges A. Comparative experimental study of inverting and everting sutures in the colon.  J Chir (Paris). 1975;109(5-6):691-696
PubMed
Irvin TT, Edwards JP. Comparison of single-layer inverting, two-layer inverting, and everting anastomoses in the rabbit colon.  Br J Surg. 1973;60(6):453-457
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Le Douarec P, Jouanneau P. Colic anastomosis: experimental study of sutures in one plane of the rabbit colon; comparison of direct and intraluminal sutures.  J Chir (Paris). 1972;104(5):451-464
PubMed
Goligher JC, Morris C, McAdam WA, De Dombal FT, Johnston D. A controlled trial of inverting versus everting intestinal suture in clinical large-bowel surgery.  Br J Surg. 1970;57(11):817-822
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Langer S. Complex investigation of the efficiency of large bowel anastomosis techniques (clinical and experimental studies).  Chirurgia Gastroenterologica. 1975;9:69-80
McAdams AJ, Meikle AG, Taylor JO. One layer or two layer colonic anastomoses?  Am J Surg. 1970;120(4):546-550
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Graffner H, Andersson L, Löwenhielm P, Walther B. The healing process of anastomoses of the colon: a comparative study using single, double-layer or stapled anastomosis.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1984;27(12):767-771
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Templeton JL, McKelvey ST. Low colorectal anastomoses: an experimental assessment of two sutured and two stapled techniques.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1985;28(1):38-41
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yesilkaya Y, Soyhan N, Bengisu N, Sen M, Aritas Y. The effects of different suture techniques on collagen metabolism in experimental distal colonic anastomoses.  Br J Surg. 1985;72(12):987-989
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Schillaci A, Cavallaro A, Stipa S. Comparative results of three different techniques for colonic anastomosis in the dog.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1979;149(2):238-240
PubMed
Chung RS. Blood flow in colonic anastomoses: effect of stapling and suturing.  Ann Surg. 1987;206(3):335-339
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Langer JC, Srinathan SK, Pelletier GJ. Effect of surgical technique on intestinal anastomotic healing in steroid-treated rabbits.  Dig Surg. 1996;13(3):205-208
Link to Article
Reichel K, Rauner P, Guthy E. Clinical and experimental evaluation of single and double layer entero anastomosis.  Chirurgia Gastroenterologica. 1975;9:461-467
Athar M, Chaudhry NI, Shakoor A, Khan MA. Studies on end-to-end colonic anastomosis in the dog: a comparison of techniques.  Acta Vet Hung. 1996;44(3):349-356
PubMed
Herzog B. The one-layer and two-layer intestinal anastomosis in animal experiments.  Prog Pediatr Surg. 1973;5:37-59
PubMed
Wheeless CR Jr, Smith JJ. A comparison of the flow of iodine 125 through three different intestinal anastomoses: standard, Gambee, and stapler.  Obstet Gynecol. 1983;62(4):513-518
PubMed
Everett WG. A comparison of one layer and two layer techniques for colorectal anastomosis.  Br J Surg. 1975;62(2):135-140
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ceraldi CM, Rypins EB, Monahan M, Chang B, Sarfeh IJ. Comparison of continuous single layer polypropylene anastomosis with double layer and stapled anastomoses in elective colon resections.  Am Surg. 1993;59(3):168-171
PubMed
Fielding LP, Stewart-Brown S, Blesovsky L, Kearney G. Anastomotic integrity after operations for large-bowel cancer: a multicentre study.  Br Med J. 1980;281(6237):411-414
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Delaitre B, Champault G, Chapuis Y, Patel JC, Louvel A, Leger L. Continuous and interrupted intestinal sutures: experimental and clinical study [in French].  J Chir (Paris). 1977;113(1):43-57
PubMed
Shandall A, Lowndes R, Young HL. Colonic anastomotic healing and oxygen tension.  Br J Surg. 1985;72(8):606-609
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jiborn H, Ahonen J, Zederfeldt B. Healing of experimental colonic anastomoses, II: breaking strength of the colon after left colon resection and anastomosis.  Am J Surg. 1978;136(5):595-599
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jiborn H, Ahonen J, Zederfeldt B. Healing of experimental colonic anastomoses, I: bursting strength of the colon after left colon resection and anastomosis.  Am J Surg. 1978;136(5):587-594
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Deen KI, Smart PJ. Prospective evaluation of sutured, continuous, and interrupted single layer colonic anastomoses.  Eur J Surg. 1995;161(10):751-753
PubMed
AhChong AK, Chiu KM, Law IC, Chu MK, Yip AW. Single-layer continuous anastomosis in gastrointestinal surgery: a prospective audit.  Aust N Z J Surg. 1996;66(1):34-36
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bailey HR, LaVoo JW, Max E, Smith KW, Butts DR, Hampton JM. Single-layer polypropylene colorectal anastomosis: experience with 100 cases.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1984;27(1):19-23
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Flyger HL, Håkansson TU, Jensen LP. Single layer colonic anastomosis with a continuous absorbable monofilament polyglyconate suture.  Eur J Surg. 1995;161(12):911-913
PubMed
Harder F, Vogelbach P. Single-layer end-on continuous suture of colonic anastomoses.  Am J Surg. 1988;155(4):611-614
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Huguier M, Houry S. Manual colorectal anastomosis: immediate results [in French].  Nouv Presse Med. 1982;11(29):2211-2213
PubMed
Jonsell G, Edelmann G. Single-layer anastomosis of the colon: a review of 165 cases.  Am J Surg. 1978;135(5):630-632
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Khubchandani M, Upson JF. Single-layer anastomosis of the colon and rectum.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1982;25(2):113-117
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Law WL, Bailey HR, Max E,  et al.  Single-layer continuous colon and rectal anastomosis using monofilament absorbable suture (Maxon): study of 500 cases.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1999;42(6):736-740
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Matheson NA, Valerio D, Farquharson A, Thomson H. Single-layer anastomosis in the large bowel: ten years' experience.  J R Soc Med. 1981;74(1):44-48
PubMed
Max E, Sweeney WB, Bailey HR,  et al.  Results of 1,000 single-layer continuous polypropylene intestinal anastomoses.  Am J Surg. 1991;162(5):461-467
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pramateftakis MG, Vrakas G, Hatzigianni P,  et al.  The handsewn anastomosis after colon resection due to colonic cancer.  Tech Coloproctol. 2010;14:(suppl 1)  S57-S59
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sarin S, Lightwood RG. Continuous single-layer gastrointestinal anastomosis: a prospective audit.  Br J Surg. 1989;76(5):493-495
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Thomson WH, Robinson MH. One-layer continuously sutured colonic anastomosis.  Br J Surg. 1993;80(11):1450-1451
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Volk A, Kersting S, Held HC, Saeger HD. Risk factors for morbidity and mortality after single-layer continuous suture for ileocolonic anastomosis.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011;26(3):321-327
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jiborn H, Ahonen J, Zederfeldt B. Healing of experimental colonic anastomoses: the effect of suture technic on collagen concentration in the colonic wall.  Am J Surg. 1978;135(3):333-340
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Beart RW Jr, Kelly KA. Randomized prospective evaluation of the EEA stapler for colorectal anastomoses.  Am J Surg. 1981;141(1):143-147
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Brennan SS, Pickford IR, Evans M, Pollock AV. Staples or sutures for colonic anastomoses—a controlled clinical trial.  Br J Surg. 1982;69(12):722-724
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cajozzo M, Compagno G, DiTora P, Spallitta SI, Bazan P. Advantages and disadvantages of mechanical vs. manual anastomosis in colorectal surgery: a prospective study.  Acta Chir Scand. 1990;156(2):167-169
PubMed
Docherty JG, McGregor JR, Akyol AM, Murray GD, Galloway DJ.West of Scotland and Highland Anastomosis Study Group.  Comparison of manually constructed and stapled anastomoses in colorectal surgery.  Ann Surg. 1995;221(2):176-184
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Elhadad A. Colorectal anastomosis: manual or mechanical? a controlled multicenter study [in French].  Chirurgie. 1990;116(4-5):425-428
PubMed
Everett WG, Friend PJ, Forty J. Comparison of stapling and hand-suture for left-sided large bowel anastomosis.  Br J Surg. 1986;73(5):345-348
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fingerhut A, Elhadad A, Hay JM, Lacaine F, Flamant Y.French Associations for Surgical Research.  Infraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis: hand-sewn versus circular staples—a controlled clinical trial.  Surgery. 1994;116(3):484-490
PubMed
Fingerhut A, Hay JM, Elhadad A, Lacaine F, Flamant Y.French Associations for Surgical Research.  Supraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis: hand-sewn versus circular staples—a controlled clinical trial.  Surgery. 1995;118(3):479-485
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Friend PJ, Scott R, Everett WG, Scott IH. Stapling or suturing for anastomoses of the left side of the large intestine.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1990;171(5):373-376
PubMed
Kracht M, Hay JM, Fagniez PL, Fingerhut A. Ileocolonic anastomosis after right hemicolectomy for carcinoma: stapled or hand-sewn? a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 1993;8(1):29-33
PubMed   |  Link to Article
McGinn FP, Gartell PC, Clifford PC, Brunton FJ. Staples or sutures for low colorectal anastomoses: a prospective randomized trial.  Br J Surg. 1985;72(8):603-605
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Moreno Gonzalez E, Rico Selas P, Mansilla Molina D,  et al.  Results of surgery for cancer of the rectum with sphincter conservation: a randomized study on instrumental versus manual anastomosis.  Acta Oncol. 1989;28(2):241-244
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sarker SK, Chaudhry R, Sinha VK. A comparison of stapled vs handsewn anastomosis in anterior resection for carcinoma rectum.  Indian J Cancer. 1994;31(2):133-137
PubMed
Lustosa SA, Matos D, Atallah AN, Castro AA. Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;(3):CD003144
PubMed
MacRae HM, McLeod RS. Handsewn vs. stapled anastomoses in colon and rectal surgery: a meta-analysis.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1998;41(2):180-189
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Choy PY, Bissett IP, Docherty JG, Parry BR, Merrie AE. Stapled versus handsewn methods for ileocolic anastomoses.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(3):CD004320
PubMed
Jansson OK, Zilling TL, Walther BS. Healing of colonic anastomoses: comparative experimental study of glued, manually sutured, and stapled anastomoses.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1991;34(7):557-562
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Polglase AL, Hughes ES, McDermott FT, Pihl E, Burke FR. A comparison of end-to-end staple and suture colorectal anastomosis in the dog.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1981;152(6):792-796
PubMed
Senagore A, Milsom JW, Walshaw RK, Dunston R, Chaudry IH. Direct comparison between Czerny-Lembert and circular-stapled anastomotic techniques in colorectal anastomosis: a similar pattern of healing for both.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1992;35(9):862-869
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Singer MA, Cintron JR, Benedetti E, Lamba A, Abcarian H. Hand-sewn versus stapled intestinal anastomoses in a chronically steroid-treated porcine model.  Am Surg. 2004;70(2):151-156
PubMed
Kozol RA, Mulligan M, Downes RJ, Forouhar FA, Kreutzer DL. Early colonic anastomotic edema: evaluation of stapled vs. hand-sewn anastomoses.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1988;31(7):503-506
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Moss G. Colorectal anastomotic strength: staples vs conventional sutures.  J Abdom Surg. 1984;26:73-77
Buchmann P, Schneider K, Gebbers JO. Fibrosis of experimental colonic anastomosis in dogs after EEA stapling or suturing.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1983;26(4):217-220
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Julian TB, Kolachalam RB. Microangiographic study of healing wounds in canine intestinal anastomoses.  Vasc Surg. 1989;23(4):296-303
Link to Article
Montesani C, De Milito R, Chiappalone S, Narilli P, D’Amato A, Ribotta G. Critical evaluation of the anastomoses in large bowel surgery: experience gained in 533 cases.  Hepatogastroenterology. 1992;39(4):304-308
PubMed
Resegotti A, Astegiano M, Farina EC,  et al.  Side-to-side stapled anastomosis strongly reduces anastomotic leak rates in Crohn's disease surgery.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48(3):464-468
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Anwar S, Hughes S, Eadie AJ, Scott NA. Anastomotic technique and survival after right hemicolectomy for colorectal cancer.  Surgeon. 2004;2(5):277-280
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Smedh K, Andersson M, Johansson H, Hagberg T. Preoperative management is more important than choice of sutured or stapled anastomosis in Crohn's disease.  Eur J Surg. 2002;168(3):154-157
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sielezneff I, Malouf AJ, Pirro N, Cesari J, Brunet C, Sastre B. Short-term functional outcome following elective surgery for complicated sigmoid diverticular disease: sutured or stapled end-to-end anastomosis to the proximal rectum?  Colorectal Dis. 2001;3(1):23-27
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Scher KS, Scott-Conner C, Jones CW, Leach M. A comparison of stapled and sutured anastomoses in colonic operations.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1982;155(4):489-493
PubMed
Adloff M, Arnaud JP, Beehary S. Stapled vs sutured colorectal anastomosis.  Arch Surg. 1980;115(12):1436-1438
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kent C, Warner K, Miller J, Schreiber H. Ileocolonic anastomosis: a comparison of the patency of stapled versus hand-sewn techniques.  Am Surg. 1992;58(10):638-640
PubMed
Dziki AJ, Duncan MD, Harmon JW,  et al.  Advantages of handsewn over stapled bowel anastomosis.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1991;34(6):442-448
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Smith AD, Bubrick MP, Mestitz ST,  et al.  Evaluation of the biofragmentable anastomotic ring following preoperative irradiation to the rectosigmoid in dogs.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1988;31(1):5-9
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bundy CA, Jacobs DM, Zera RT, Bubrick MP. Comparison of bursting pressure of sutured, stapled and BAR anastomoses.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 1993;8(1):1-3
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Maney JW, Katz AR, Li LK, Pace WG, Hardy TG. Biofragmentable bowel anastomosis ring: comparative efficacy studies in dogs.  Surgery. 1988;103(1):56-62
PubMed
Gullichsen R. The biofragmentable ring in intestinal surgery.  Eur J Surg Suppl. 1993;(569):1-31
PubMed
Cahill CJ, Betzler M, Gruwez JA, Jeekel J, Patel JC, Zederfeldt B. Sutureless large bowel anastomosis: European experience with the biofragmentable anastomosis ring.  Br J Surg. 1989;76(4):344-347
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Corman ML, Prager ED, Hardy TG Jr, Bubrick MP. Comparison of the Valtrac biofragmentable anastomosis ring with conventional suture and stapled anastomosis in colon surgery: results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1989;32(3):183-187
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bubrick MP, Corman ML, Cahill CJ, Hardy TG Jr, Nance FC, Shatney CH.BAR Investigational Group.  Prospective, randomized trial of the biofragmentable anastomosis ring.  Am J Surg. 1991;161(1):136-143
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gullichsen R, Havia T, Ovaska J, Rantala A. Colonic anastomosis using the biofragmentable anastomotic ring and manual suture: a prospective, randomized study.  Br J Surg. 1992;79(6):578-580
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Dyess DL, Curreri PW, Ferrara JJ. A new technique for sutureless intestinal anastomosis: a prospective, randomized, clinical trial.  Am Surg. 1990;56(2):71-75
PubMed
Påhlman L, Ejerblad S, Graf W,  et al.  Randomized trial of a biofragmentable bowel anastomosis ring in high-risk colonic resection.  Br J Surg. 1997;84(9):1291-1294
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sailer M, Debus ES, Fuchs KH, Beyerlein J, Thiede A. Comparison of anastomotic microcirculation in coloanal J-pouches versus straight and side-to-end coloanal reconstruction: an experimental study in the pig.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 2000;15(2):114-117
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Willis S, Hölzl F, Krones CJ, Tittel A, Schumpelick V. Evaluation of anastomotic microcirculation after low anterior rectal resection: an experimental study with different reconstruction forms in dogs.  Tech Coloproctol. 2006;10(3):222-226
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Brisinda G, Vanella S, Cadeddu F,  et al.  End-to-end versus end-to-side stapled anastomoses after anterior resection for rectal cancer.  J Surg Oncol. 2009;99(1):75-79
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Tsunoda A, Kamiyama G, Narita K, Watanabe M, Nakao K, Kusano M. Prospective randomized trial for determination of optimum size of side limb in low anterior resection with side-to-end anastomosis for rectal carcinoma.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2009;52(9):1572-1577
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Durdey P, Bucknall TE. Assessment of sutures for use in colonic surgery: an experimental study.  J R Soc Med. 1984;77(6):472-477
PubMed
Houdart R, Lavergne A, Valleur P, Hautefeuille P. Polydioxanone in digestive surgery: an experimental study.  Am J Surg. 1986;152(3):268-271
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lerwick E. Studies on the efficacy and safety of polydioxanone monofilament absorbable suture.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1983;156(1):51-55
PubMed
Ray JA, Doddi N, Regula D, Williams JA, Melveger A. Polydioxanone (PDS), a novel monofilament synthetic absorbable suture.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1981;153(4):497-507
PubMed
Lembert A. Mémoire sur L'entéroraphie avec la description d'un procédé nouveau pour pratiquer cette opération chirurgicale. In: Breschet MG, ed. Répertoire Général d’Anatomie et de Physiologie Pathologique et des Cliniques Chirurgicale. Vol 2. Paris, France: Boiste Fils; 1826:100-107
Egorov VI, Schastlivtsev V, Turusov RA, Baranov AO. Participation of the intestinal layers in supplying of the mechanical strength of the intact and sutured gut.  Eur Surg Res. 2002;34(6):425-431
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Tera H, Aberg C. Tissue holding power to a single suture in different parts of the alimentary tract.  Acta Chir Scand. 1976;142(5):343-348
PubMed
Buyers RA, Meier LA. Everting suture of the bowel: experimental and clinical experience in duodenal closure and colorectal anastomosis.  Surgery. 1968;63(3):475-480
PubMed
Getzen LC. Clinical use of everted intestinal anastomoses.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1966;123(5):1027-1036
PubMed
Ballantyne GH. The experimental basis of intestinal suturing: effect of surgical technique, inflammation, and infection on enteric wound healing.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1984;27(1):61-71
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Thornton FJ, Barbul A. Healing in the gastrointestinal tract.  Surg Clin North Am. 1997;77(3):549-573
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yale CE, Van Gemert JV. Healing of inverted and everted intestinal anastomoses in germfree rats.  Surgery. 1971;69(3):382-388
PubMed
Getzen LC, Roe RD, Holloway CK. Comparative study of intestinal anastomotic healing in inverted and everted closures.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1966;123(6):1219-1227
PubMed
Garner A, Hargreaves AW, Keddie NC. Colonic anastomosis: a histopathological study in the rabbit.  Br J Surg. 1969;56(9):673-676
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Czerny V. Zur Darmresektion.  Berl Klin Wschr. 1880;17:637
Halstead W. Circular suture of the intestine: an experimental study.  Am J Med Sci. 1887;94:436-461
Link to Article
Gambee LP. A single-layer open intestinal anastomosis applicable to the small as well as the large intestine.  West J Surg Obstet Gynecol. 1951;59(1):1-5
PubMed
Gambee LP, Garnjobst W, Hardwick CE. Ten years' experience with a single layer anastomosis in colon surgery.  Am J Surg. 1956;92(2):222-227
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Burch JM, Franciose RJ, Moore EE, Biffl WL, Offner PJ. Single-layer continuous versus two-layer interrupted intestinal anastomosis: a prospective randomized trial.  Ann Surg. 2000;231(6):832-837
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Denans F. Nouveau procédé pour la guerison des plaies des intestins: receuil de la société Royale de Medecine de Marseille. Marseille, France: Imprimerie d’Archard; 1827:4
Murphy JB. Cholecysto-intestinal, gastro-intestinal, entero-intestinal anastomosis, and approximation without sutures.  Medical Record. 1892;42:665-676
Wullstein C, Gross E. Compression anastomosis (AKA-2) in colorectal surgery: results in 442 consecutive patients.  Br J Surg. 2000;87(8):1071-1075
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kim SH, Choi HJ, Park KJ,  et al.  Sutureless intestinal anastomosis with the biofragmentable anastomosis ring: experience of 632 anastomoses in a single institute.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48(11):2127-2132
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Di Castro A, Biancari F, Brocato R, Adami EA, Truosolo B, Massi G. Intestinal anastomosis with the biofragmentable anastomosis ring.  Am J Surg. 1998;176(5):472-474
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Thiede A, Geiger D, Dietz UA,  et al.  Overview on compression anastomoses: biofragmentable anastomosis ring multicenter prospective trial of 1666 anastomoses.  World J Surg. 1998;22(1):78-87
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Alberts JC, Parvaiz A, Moran BJ. Predicting risk and diminishing the consequences of anastomotic dehiscence following rectal resection.  Colorectal Dis. 2003;5(5):478-482
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Branagan G, Finnis D.Wessex Colorectal Cancer Audit Working Group.  Prognosis after anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48(5):1021-1026
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fielding LP, Phillips RK, Hittinger R. Factors influencing mortality after curative resection for large bowel cancer in elderly patients.  Lancet. 1989;1(8638):595-597
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) flowchart: selection of relevant studies.

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Included Studies on Suture Material
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Included Studies on Suture Format
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Included Studies on Single- vs Double-Layer Colorectal Anastomosisa
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Included Studies on Interrupted vs Continuous Sutures
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 5. Included Studies on Hand-Sewn vs Stapled Colorectal Anastomosis
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 6. Included Studies on Hand-Sewn vs Compression Colorectal Anastomosis
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 7. Included Studies on Configuration

References

Hyman N, Manchester TL, Osler T, Burns B, Cataldo PA. Anastomotic leaks after intestinal anastomosis: it's later than you think.  Ann Surg. 2007;245(2):254-258
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Matthiessen P, Hallböök O, Rutegård J, Simert G, Sjödahl R. Defunctioning stoma reduces symptomatic anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection of the rectum for cancer: a randomized multicenter trial.  Ann Surg. 2007;246(2):207-214
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Alves A, Panis Y, Trancart D, Regimbeau JM, Pocard M, Valleur P. Factors associated with clinically significant anastomotic leakage after large bowel resection: multivariate analysis of 707 patients.  World J Surg. 2002;26(4):499-502
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Peeters KC, Tollenaar RA, Marijnen CA,  et al; Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group.  Risk factors for anastomotic failure after total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer.  Br J Surg. 2005;92(2):211-216
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Komen N, Dijk JW, Lalmahomed Z,  et al.  After-hours colorectal surgery: a risk factor for anastomotic leakage.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 2009;24(7):789-795
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Zorcolo L, Covotta L, Carlomagno N, Bartolo DC. Toward lowering morbidity, mortality, and stoma formation in emergency colorectal surgery: the role of specialization.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2003;46(11):1461-1468
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yeh CY, Changchien CR, Wang JY,  et al.  Pelvic drainage and other risk factors for leakage after elective anterior resection in rectal cancer patients: a prospective study of 978 patients.  Ann Surg. 2005;241(1):9-13
PubMed
Matthiessen P, Hallböök O, Andersson M, Rutegård J, Sjödahl R. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection of the rectum.  Colorectal Dis. 2004;6(6):462-469
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Rullier E, Laurent C, Garrelon JL, Michel P, Saric J, Parneix M. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after resection of rectal cancer.  Br J Surg. 1998;85(3):355-358
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Vignali A, Fazio VW, Lavery IC,  et al.  Factors associated with the occurrence of leaks in stapled rectal anastomoses: a review of 1,014 patients.  J Am Coll Surg. 1997;185(2):105-113
PubMed
Mann B, Kleinschmidt S, Stremmel W. Prospective study of hand-sutured anastomosis after colorectal resection.  Br J Surg. 1996;83(1):29-31
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Detry RJ, Kartheuser A, Delriviere L, Saba J, Kestens PJ. Use of the circular stapler in 1000 consecutive colorectal anastomoses: experience of one surgical team.  Surgery. 1995;117(2):140-145
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hastings JC, Winkle WV, Barker E, Hines D, Nichols W. Effect of suture materials on healing wounds of the stomach and colon.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1975;140(5):701-707
PubMed
Letwin ER. Evaluation of polyglycolic acid sutures in colon anastomoses.  Can J Surg. 1975;18(1):30-32
PubMed
Orringer MB, Appleman HD, Argenta L, Bove E, Cimmino V. Polypropylene suture in esophageal and gastrointestinal operations.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1977;144(1):67-70
PubMed
Deveney KE, Way LW. Effect of different absorbable sutures on healing of gastrointestinal anastomoses.  Am J Surg. 1977;133(1):86-94
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Foresman PA, Edlich RF, Rodeheaver GT. The effect of new monofilament absorbable sutures on the healing of musculoaponeurotic incisions, gastrotomies, and colonic anastomoses.  Arch Surg. 1989;124(6):708-710
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lord MG, Broughton AC, Williams HT. A morphologic study on the effect of suturing the submucosa of the large intestine.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1978;146(2):211-216
PubMed
Munday C, McGinn FP. A comparison of polyglycolic acid and catgut sutures in rat colonic anastomoses.  Br J Surg. 1976;63(11):870-872
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Andersen E, Søndenaa K, Holter J. A comparative study of polydioxanone (PDS) and polyglactin 910 (Vicryl) in colonic anastomoses in rats.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 1989;4(4):251-254
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pascual I, de Miguel GF, Gómez-Pinedo UA, de Miguel F, Arranz MG, García-Olmo D. Adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells in biosutures do not improve healing of experimental colonic anastomoses.  Br J Surg. 2008;95(9):1180-1184
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pasternak B, Rehn M, Andersen L,  et al.  Doxycycline-coated sutures improve mechanical strength of intestinal anastomoses.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008;23(3):271-276
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Clark CG, Wyllie JH, Haggie SJ, Renton P. Comparison of catgut and polyglycolic acid sutures in colonic anastomoses.  World J Surg. 1977;1(4):501-505
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gillatt DA, Corfield AP, May RE, Bartolo DC, Leaper DJ. Polydioxanone suture in the gastrointestinal tract.  Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1987;69(2):54-56
PubMed
Högström H, Haglund U, Zederfeldt B. Suture technique and early breaking strength of intestinal anastomoses and laparotomy wounds.  Acta Chir Scand. 1985;151(5):441-443
PubMed
Greenall MJ, Evans M, Pollock AV. Influence of depth of suture bite on integrity of single-layer large-bowel anastomoses: controlled trial.  J R Soc Med. 1979;72(5):351-356
PubMed
Waninger J, Kauffmann GW, Shah IA, Farthmann EH. Influence of the distance between interrupted sutures and the tension of sutures on the healing of experimental colonic anastomoses.  Am J Surg. 1992;163(3):319-323
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Houdart R, Lavergne A, Galian A, Hautefeuille P. Anatomo-pathological evolution of single-layer end-to-end digestive anastomoses: a study of 210 colonic anastomoses in rats from the 2nd to the 180th day.  Gastroenterol Clin Biol. 1983;7(5):465-473
PubMed
Krasniqi A, Gashi-Luci L, Krasniqi S,  et al.  A comparison of three single layer anastomotic techniques in the colon of the rat.  Int J Surg. 2009;7(1):31-35
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Leslie A, Steele RJ. The interrupted serosubmucosal anastomosis—still the gold standard.  Colorectal Dis. 2003;5(4):362-366
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pye G, Steele RJ. Anastomoses involving the colon and rectum: an 8-year experience.  J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1996;41(2):95-96
PubMed
Carty NJ, Keating J, Campbell J, Karanjia N, Heald RJ. Prospective audit of an extramucosal technique for intestinal anastomosis.  Br J Surg. 1991;78(12):1439-1441
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lafreniere R, Ketcham AS. A single layer open anastomosis for all intestinal structures.  Am J Surg. 1985;149(6):797-798
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Motson RW, Bolwell JS, Heath AL, Makin CA, Al Sawaf H. One-layer colonic anastomosis with polyglycolic acid (Dexon) suture: a 3-year prospective audit.  Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1984;66(1):19-21
PubMed
Ortiz H, Azpeitia D, Casalots J, Sitges A. Comparative experimental study of inverting and everting sutures in the colon.  J Chir (Paris). 1975;109(5-6):691-696
PubMed
Irvin TT, Edwards JP. Comparison of single-layer inverting, two-layer inverting, and everting anastomoses in the rabbit colon.  Br J Surg. 1973;60(6):453-457
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Le Douarec P, Jouanneau P. Colic anastomosis: experimental study of sutures in one plane of the rabbit colon; comparison of direct and intraluminal sutures.  J Chir (Paris). 1972;104(5):451-464
PubMed
Goligher JC, Morris C, McAdam WA, De Dombal FT, Johnston D. A controlled trial of inverting versus everting intestinal suture in clinical large-bowel surgery.  Br J Surg. 1970;57(11):817-822
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Langer S. Complex investigation of the efficiency of large bowel anastomosis techniques (clinical and experimental studies).  Chirurgia Gastroenterologica. 1975;9:69-80
McAdams AJ, Meikle AG, Taylor JO. One layer or two layer colonic anastomoses?  Am J Surg. 1970;120(4):546-550
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Graffner H, Andersson L, Löwenhielm P, Walther B. The healing process of anastomoses of the colon: a comparative study using single, double-layer or stapled anastomosis.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1984;27(12):767-771
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Templeton JL, McKelvey ST. Low colorectal anastomoses: an experimental assessment of two sutured and two stapled techniques.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1985;28(1):38-41
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yesilkaya Y, Soyhan N, Bengisu N, Sen M, Aritas Y. The effects of different suture techniques on collagen metabolism in experimental distal colonic anastomoses.  Br J Surg. 1985;72(12):987-989
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Schillaci A, Cavallaro A, Stipa S. Comparative results of three different techniques for colonic anastomosis in the dog.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1979;149(2):238-240
PubMed
Chung RS. Blood flow in colonic anastomoses: effect of stapling and suturing.  Ann Surg. 1987;206(3):335-339
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Langer JC, Srinathan SK, Pelletier GJ. Effect of surgical technique on intestinal anastomotic healing in steroid-treated rabbits.  Dig Surg. 1996;13(3):205-208
Link to Article
Reichel K, Rauner P, Guthy E. Clinical and experimental evaluation of single and double layer entero anastomosis.  Chirurgia Gastroenterologica. 1975;9:461-467
Athar M, Chaudhry NI, Shakoor A, Khan MA. Studies on end-to-end colonic anastomosis in the dog: a comparison of techniques.  Acta Vet Hung. 1996;44(3):349-356
PubMed
Herzog B. The one-layer and two-layer intestinal anastomosis in animal experiments.  Prog Pediatr Surg. 1973;5:37-59
PubMed
Wheeless CR Jr, Smith JJ. A comparison of the flow of iodine 125 through three different intestinal anastomoses: standard, Gambee, and stapler.  Obstet Gynecol. 1983;62(4):513-518
PubMed
Everett WG. A comparison of one layer and two layer techniques for colorectal anastomosis.  Br J Surg. 1975;62(2):135-140
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ceraldi CM, Rypins EB, Monahan M, Chang B, Sarfeh IJ. Comparison of continuous single layer polypropylene anastomosis with double layer and stapled anastomoses in elective colon resections.  Am Surg. 1993;59(3):168-171
PubMed
Fielding LP, Stewart-Brown S, Blesovsky L, Kearney G. Anastomotic integrity after operations for large-bowel cancer: a multicentre study.  Br Med J. 1980;281(6237):411-414
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Delaitre B, Champault G, Chapuis Y, Patel JC, Louvel A, Leger L. Continuous and interrupted intestinal sutures: experimental and clinical study [in French].  J Chir (Paris). 1977;113(1):43-57
PubMed
Shandall A, Lowndes R, Young HL. Colonic anastomotic healing and oxygen tension.  Br J Surg. 1985;72(8):606-609
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jiborn H, Ahonen J, Zederfeldt B. Healing of experimental colonic anastomoses, II: breaking strength of the colon after left colon resection and anastomosis.  Am J Surg. 1978;136(5):595-599
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jiborn H, Ahonen J, Zederfeldt B. Healing of experimental colonic anastomoses, I: bursting strength of the colon after left colon resection and anastomosis.  Am J Surg. 1978;136(5):587-594
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Deen KI, Smart PJ. Prospective evaluation of sutured, continuous, and interrupted single layer colonic anastomoses.  Eur J Surg. 1995;161(10):751-753
PubMed
AhChong AK, Chiu KM, Law IC, Chu MK, Yip AW. Single-layer continuous anastomosis in gastrointestinal surgery: a prospective audit.  Aust N Z J Surg. 1996;66(1):34-36
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bailey HR, LaVoo JW, Max E, Smith KW, Butts DR, Hampton JM. Single-layer polypropylene colorectal anastomosis: experience with 100 cases.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1984;27(1):19-23
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Flyger HL, Håkansson TU, Jensen LP. Single layer colonic anastomosis with a continuous absorbable monofilament polyglyconate suture.  Eur J Surg. 1995;161(12):911-913
PubMed
Harder F, Vogelbach P. Single-layer end-on continuous suture of colonic anastomoses.  Am J Surg. 1988;155(4):611-614
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Huguier M, Houry S. Manual colorectal anastomosis: immediate results [in French].  Nouv Presse Med. 1982;11(29):2211-2213
PubMed
Jonsell G, Edelmann G. Single-layer anastomosis of the colon: a review of 165 cases.  Am J Surg. 1978;135(5):630-632
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Khubchandani M, Upson JF. Single-layer anastomosis of the colon and rectum.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1982;25(2):113-117
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Law WL, Bailey HR, Max E,  et al.  Single-layer continuous colon and rectal anastomosis using monofilament absorbable suture (Maxon): study of 500 cases.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1999;42(6):736-740
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Matheson NA, Valerio D, Farquharson A, Thomson H. Single-layer anastomosis in the large bowel: ten years' experience.  J R Soc Med. 1981;74(1):44-48
PubMed
Max E, Sweeney WB, Bailey HR,  et al.  Results of 1,000 single-layer continuous polypropylene intestinal anastomoses.  Am J Surg. 1991;162(5):461-467
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pramateftakis MG, Vrakas G, Hatzigianni P,  et al.  The handsewn anastomosis after colon resection due to colonic cancer.  Tech Coloproctol. 2010;14:(suppl 1)  S57-S59
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sarin S, Lightwood RG. Continuous single-layer gastrointestinal anastomosis: a prospective audit.  Br J Surg. 1989;76(5):493-495
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Thomson WH, Robinson MH. One-layer continuously sutured colonic anastomosis.  Br J Surg. 1993;80(11):1450-1451
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Volk A, Kersting S, Held HC, Saeger HD. Risk factors for morbidity and mortality after single-layer continuous suture for ileocolonic anastomosis.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011;26(3):321-327
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Jiborn H, Ahonen J, Zederfeldt B. Healing of experimental colonic anastomoses: the effect of suture technic on collagen concentration in the colonic wall.  Am J Surg. 1978;135(3):333-340
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Beart RW Jr, Kelly KA. Randomized prospective evaluation of the EEA stapler for colorectal anastomoses.  Am J Surg. 1981;141(1):143-147
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Brennan SS, Pickford IR, Evans M, Pollock AV. Staples or sutures for colonic anastomoses—a controlled clinical trial.  Br J Surg. 1982;69(12):722-724
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cajozzo M, Compagno G, DiTora P, Spallitta SI, Bazan P. Advantages and disadvantages of mechanical vs. manual anastomosis in colorectal surgery: a prospective study.  Acta Chir Scand. 1990;156(2):167-169
PubMed
Docherty JG, McGregor JR, Akyol AM, Murray GD, Galloway DJ.West of Scotland and Highland Anastomosis Study Group.  Comparison of manually constructed and stapled anastomoses in colorectal surgery.  Ann Surg. 1995;221(2):176-184
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Elhadad A. Colorectal anastomosis: manual or mechanical? a controlled multicenter study [in French].  Chirurgie. 1990;116(4-5):425-428
PubMed
Everett WG, Friend PJ, Forty J. Comparison of stapling and hand-suture for left-sided large bowel anastomosis.  Br J Surg. 1986;73(5):345-348
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fingerhut A, Elhadad A, Hay JM, Lacaine F, Flamant Y.French Associations for Surgical Research.  Infraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis: hand-sewn versus circular staples—a controlled clinical trial.  Surgery. 1994;116(3):484-490
PubMed
Fingerhut A, Hay JM, Elhadad A, Lacaine F, Flamant Y.French Associations for Surgical Research.  Supraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis: hand-sewn versus circular staples—a controlled clinical trial.  Surgery. 1995;118(3):479-485
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Friend PJ, Scott R, Everett WG, Scott IH. Stapling or suturing for anastomoses of the left side of the large intestine.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1990;171(5):373-376
PubMed
Kracht M, Hay JM, Fagniez PL, Fingerhut A. Ileocolonic anastomosis after right hemicolectomy for carcinoma: stapled or hand-sewn? a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 1993;8(1):29-33
PubMed   |  Link to Article
McGinn FP, Gartell PC, Clifford PC, Brunton FJ. Staples or sutures for low colorectal anastomoses: a prospective randomized trial.  Br J Surg. 1985;72(8):603-605
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Moreno Gonzalez E, Rico Selas P, Mansilla Molina D,  et al.  Results of surgery for cancer of the rectum with sphincter conservation: a randomized study on instrumental versus manual anastomosis.  Acta Oncol. 1989;28(2):241-244
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sarker SK, Chaudhry R, Sinha VK. A comparison of stapled vs handsewn anastomosis in anterior resection for carcinoma rectum.  Indian J Cancer. 1994;31(2):133-137
PubMed
Lustosa SA, Matos D, Atallah AN, Castro AA. Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;(3):CD003144
PubMed
MacRae HM, McLeod RS. Handsewn vs. stapled anastomoses in colon and rectal surgery: a meta-analysis.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1998;41(2):180-189
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Choy PY, Bissett IP, Docherty JG, Parry BR, Merrie AE. Stapled versus handsewn methods for ileocolic anastomoses.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(3):CD004320
PubMed
Jansson OK, Zilling TL, Walther BS. Healing of colonic anastomoses: comparative experimental study of glued, manually sutured, and stapled anastomoses.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1991;34(7):557-562
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Polglase AL, Hughes ES, McDermott FT, Pihl E, Burke FR. A comparison of end-to-end staple and suture colorectal anastomosis in the dog.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1981;152(6):792-796
PubMed
Senagore A, Milsom JW, Walshaw RK, Dunston R, Chaudry IH. Direct comparison between Czerny-Lembert and circular-stapled anastomotic techniques in colorectal anastomosis: a similar pattern of healing for both.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1992;35(9):862-869
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Singer MA, Cintron JR, Benedetti E, Lamba A, Abcarian H. Hand-sewn versus stapled intestinal anastomoses in a chronically steroid-treated porcine model.  Am Surg. 2004;70(2):151-156
PubMed
Kozol RA, Mulligan M, Downes RJ, Forouhar FA, Kreutzer DL. Early colonic anastomotic edema: evaluation of stapled vs. hand-sewn anastomoses.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1988;31(7):503-506
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Moss G. Colorectal anastomotic strength: staples vs conventional sutures.  J Abdom Surg. 1984;26:73-77
Buchmann P, Schneider K, Gebbers JO. Fibrosis of experimental colonic anastomosis in dogs after EEA stapling or suturing.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1983;26(4):217-220
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Julian TB, Kolachalam RB. Microangiographic study of healing wounds in canine intestinal anastomoses.  Vasc Surg. 1989;23(4):296-303
Link to Article
Montesani C, De Milito R, Chiappalone S, Narilli P, D’Amato A, Ribotta G. Critical evaluation of the anastomoses in large bowel surgery: experience gained in 533 cases.  Hepatogastroenterology. 1992;39(4):304-308
PubMed
Resegotti A, Astegiano M, Farina EC,  et al.  Side-to-side stapled anastomosis strongly reduces anastomotic leak rates in Crohn's disease surgery.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48(3):464-468
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Anwar S, Hughes S, Eadie AJ, Scott NA. Anastomotic technique and survival after right hemicolectomy for colorectal cancer.  Surgeon. 2004;2(5):277-280
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Smedh K, Andersson M, Johansson H, Hagberg T. Preoperative management is more important than choice of sutured or stapled anastomosis in Crohn's disease.  Eur J Surg. 2002;168(3):154-157
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sielezneff I, Malouf AJ, Pirro N, Cesari J, Brunet C, Sastre B. Short-term functional outcome following elective surgery for complicated sigmoid diverticular disease: sutured or stapled end-to-end anastomosis to the proximal rectum?  Colorectal Dis. 2001;3(1):23-27
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Scher KS, Scott-Conner C, Jones CW, Leach M. A comparison of stapled and sutured anastomoses in colonic operations.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1982;155(4):489-493
PubMed
Adloff M, Arnaud JP, Beehary S. Stapled vs sutured colorectal anastomosis.  Arch Surg. 1980;115(12):1436-1438
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kent C, Warner K, Miller J, Schreiber H. Ileocolonic anastomosis: a comparison of the patency of stapled versus hand-sewn techniques.  Am Surg. 1992;58(10):638-640
PubMed
Dziki AJ, Duncan MD, Harmon JW,  et al.  Advantages of handsewn over stapled bowel anastomosis.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1991;34(6):442-448
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Smith AD, Bubrick MP, Mestitz ST,  et al.  Evaluation of the biofragmentable anastomotic ring following preoperative irradiation to the rectosigmoid in dogs.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1988;31(1):5-9
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bundy CA, Jacobs DM, Zera RT, Bubrick MP. Comparison of bursting pressure of sutured, stapled and BAR anastomoses.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 1993;8(1):1-3
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Maney JW, Katz AR, Li LK, Pace WG, Hardy TG. Biofragmentable bowel anastomosis ring: comparative efficacy studies in dogs.  Surgery. 1988;103(1):56-62
PubMed
Gullichsen R. The biofragmentable ring in intestinal surgery.  Eur J Surg Suppl. 1993;(569):1-31
PubMed
Cahill CJ, Betzler M, Gruwez JA, Jeekel J, Patel JC, Zederfeldt B. Sutureless large bowel anastomosis: European experience with the biofragmentable anastomosis ring.  Br J Surg. 1989;76(4):344-347
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Corman ML, Prager ED, Hardy TG Jr, Bubrick MP. Comparison of the Valtrac biofragmentable anastomosis ring with conventional suture and stapled anastomosis in colon surgery: results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1989;32(3):183-187
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bubrick MP, Corman ML, Cahill CJ, Hardy TG Jr, Nance FC, Shatney CH.BAR Investigational Group.  Prospective, randomized trial of the biofragmentable anastomosis ring.  Am J Surg. 1991;161(1):136-143
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gullichsen R, Havia T, Ovaska J, Rantala A. Colonic anastomosis using the biofragmentable anastomotic ring and manual suture: a prospective, randomized study.  Br J Surg. 1992;79(6):578-580
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Dyess DL, Curreri PW, Ferrara JJ. A new technique for sutureless intestinal anastomosis: a prospective, randomized, clinical trial.  Am Surg. 1990;56(2):71-75
PubMed
Påhlman L, Ejerblad S, Graf W,  et al.  Randomized trial of a biofragmentable bowel anastomosis ring in high-risk colonic resection.  Br J Surg. 1997;84(9):1291-1294
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sailer M, Debus ES, Fuchs KH, Beyerlein J, Thiede A. Comparison of anastomotic microcirculation in coloanal J-pouches versus straight and side-to-end coloanal reconstruction: an experimental study in the pig.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 2000;15(2):114-117
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Willis S, Hölzl F, Krones CJ, Tittel A, Schumpelick V. Evaluation of anastomotic microcirculation after low anterior rectal resection: an experimental study with different reconstruction forms in dogs.  Tech Coloproctol. 2006;10(3):222-226
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Brisinda G, Vanella S, Cadeddu F,  et al.  End-to-end versus end-to-side stapled anastomoses after anterior resection for rectal cancer.  J Surg Oncol. 2009;99(1):75-79
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Tsunoda A, Kamiyama G, Narita K, Watanabe M, Nakao K, Kusano M. Prospective randomized trial for determination of optimum size of side limb in low anterior resection with side-to-end anastomosis for rectal carcinoma.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2009;52(9):1572-1577
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Durdey P, Bucknall TE. Assessment of sutures for use in colonic surgery: an experimental study.  J R Soc Med. 1984;77(6):472-477
PubMed
Houdart R, Lavergne A, Valleur P, Hautefeuille P. Polydioxanone in digestive surgery: an experimental study.  Am J Surg. 1986;152(3):268-271
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Lerwick E. Studies on the efficacy and safety of polydioxanone monofilament absorbable suture.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1983;156(1):51-55
PubMed
Ray JA, Doddi N, Regula D, Williams JA, Melveger A. Polydioxanone (PDS), a novel monofilament synthetic absorbable suture.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1981;153(4):497-507
PubMed
Lembert A. Mémoire sur L'entéroraphie avec la description d'un procédé nouveau pour pratiquer cette opération chirurgicale. In: Breschet MG, ed. Répertoire Général d’Anatomie et de Physiologie Pathologique et des Cliniques Chirurgicale. Vol 2. Paris, France: Boiste Fils; 1826:100-107
Egorov VI, Schastlivtsev V, Turusov RA, Baranov AO. Participation of the intestinal layers in supplying of the mechanical strength of the intact and sutured gut.  Eur Surg Res. 2002;34(6):425-431
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Tera H, Aberg C. Tissue holding power to a single suture in different parts of the alimentary tract.  Acta Chir Scand. 1976;142(5):343-348
PubMed
Buyers RA, Meier LA. Everting suture of the bowel: experimental and clinical experience in duodenal closure and colorectal anastomosis.  Surgery. 1968;63(3):475-480
PubMed
Getzen LC. Clinical use of everted intestinal anastomoses.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1966;123(5):1027-1036
PubMed
Ballantyne GH. The experimental basis of intestinal suturing: effect of surgical technique, inflammation, and infection on enteric wound healing.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1984;27(1):61-71
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Thornton FJ, Barbul A. Healing in the gastrointestinal tract.  Surg Clin North Am. 1997;77(3):549-573
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Yale CE, Van Gemert JV. Healing of inverted and everted intestinal anastomoses in germfree rats.  Surgery. 1971;69(3):382-388
PubMed
Getzen LC, Roe RD, Holloway CK. Comparative study of intestinal anastomotic healing in inverted and everted closures.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1966;123(6):1219-1227
PubMed
Garner A, Hargreaves AW, Keddie NC. Colonic anastomosis: a histopathological study in the rabbit.  Br J Surg. 1969;56(9):673-676
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Czerny V. Zur Darmresektion.  Berl Klin Wschr. 1880;17:637
Halstead W. Circular suture of the intestine: an experimental study.  Am J Med Sci. 1887;94:436-461
Link to Article
Gambee LP. A single-layer open intestinal anastomosis applicable to the small as well as the large intestine.  West J Surg Obstet Gynecol. 1951;59(1):1-5
PubMed
Gambee LP, Garnjobst W, Hardwick CE. Ten years' experience with a single layer anastomosis in colon surgery.  Am J Surg. 1956;92(2):222-227
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Burch JM, Franciose RJ, Moore EE, Biffl WL, Offner PJ. Single-layer continuous versus two-layer interrupted intestinal anastomosis: a prospective randomized trial.  Ann Surg. 2000;231(6):832-837
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Denans F. Nouveau procédé pour la guerison des plaies des intestins: receuil de la société Royale de Medecine de Marseille. Marseille, France: Imprimerie d’Archard; 1827:4
Murphy JB. Cholecysto-intestinal, gastro-intestinal, entero-intestinal anastomosis, and approximation without sutures.  Medical Record. 1892;42:665-676
Wullstein C, Gross E. Compression anastomosis (AKA-2) in colorectal surgery: results in 442 consecutive patients.  Br J Surg. 2000;87(8):1071-1075
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kim SH, Choi HJ, Park KJ,  et al.  Sutureless intestinal anastomosis with the biofragmentable anastomosis ring: experience of 632 anastomoses in a single institute.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48(11):2127-2132
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Di Castro A, Biancari F, Brocato R, Adami EA, Truosolo B, Massi G. Intestinal anastomosis with the biofragmentable anastomosis ring.  Am J Surg. 1998;176(5):472-474
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Thiede A, Geiger D, Dietz UA,  et al.  Overview on compression anastomoses: biofragmentable anastomosis ring multicenter prospective trial of 1666 anastomoses.  World J Surg. 1998;22(1):78-87
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Alberts JC, Parvaiz A, Moran BJ. Predicting risk and diminishing the consequences of anastomotic dehiscence following rectal resection.  Colorectal Dis. 2003;5(5):478-482
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Branagan G, Finnis D.Wessex Colorectal Cancer Audit Working Group.  Prognosis after anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48(5):1021-1026
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fielding LP, Phillips RK, Hittinger R. Factors influencing mortality after curative resection for large bowel cancer in elderly patients.  Lancet. 1989;1(8638):595-597
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Supplemental Content

Slieker JC, Daams F, Mulder IM, Jeekel J, Lange JF. Systematic review of the technique of colorectal anastomosis: will a nonstandardized technique stand in evidence-based surgery? JAMA Surg.. 2013. doi:10.1001/2013.jamasurg.33.

eFigure. Key words used in the MEDLINE search.

Supplemental Content

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 5

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles