An initial comparative study of two techniques of laparoscopic colonic anastomosis and mesenteric defect closure

Laparoscopic colon and rectal surgery is still in its nascent stages of development. The ease, efficacy, and safety of intracorporeal mechanical colonic anastomosis are contingent upon expensive stapling devices. Although mobilization and mesenteric division are feasible, a method of inexpensive rapid anastomosis is not. A single inexpensive multifire stapler which could be used both to fashion the anastomosis and to close the mesenteric defect would be ideal. Therefore, this prospective randomized study was undertaken to compare the clinical and functional results of laparoscopic colotomy closure performed using the Endopath EMS hernia stapler (EMS; Ethicon Endosurgery Inc., Cincinnati, OH) to results of using standard two-layer hand suturing (HS). Both the colotomy itself and the mesenteric defect closure sites were included in the randomization and analysis. The abdominal cavity was assessed for evidence of anastomotic leakage, abscess, and adhesion formation. In addition, radiographic luminal diameter, bursting strength, and histology were evaluated. Eight healthy pigs were randomized to either the EMS (N = 4) or HS (N = 4). There was no evidence of leakage, abscesses, or adhesion formation in either group; however, the mesenteric defect revealed more scarring in the HS than in the EMS animals. There were no significant differences in either luminal diameter (HS: mean = 0.92 cm; EMS: mean = 0.91 cm) or bursting strength (HS: mean = 171 mm Hg; EMS: mean = 157 mm Hg) (P > 0.05). Histologic analysis also demonstrated no difference in inflammation, necrosis, or fibrosis. This study suggests that this technique can be safely applied to both colotomy closure and mesenteric defect repair.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)