SpringerLink
Log in

The experimental basis of intestinal suturing

Effect of surgical technique, inflammation, and infection on enteric wound healing

  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

Factors that incite inflammation at the healing wound prolong the lag period of wound healing and delay the return of strength at the suture line. Inflammation activates bowel-wall collagenase, which degrades the collagen within the wound, eroding the foundation in which sutures are anchored. Experimental studies have compared the impact of various surgical techniques. Sutures placed by hand uniformly invoke an inflammatory response because dragging the thread through the bowel wall injures tissue. Single-layer anastomoses heal more rapidly than double-layer suture lines. The inner layer causes avascular necrosis of the inverted cuff. Experimental studies have not clearly shown the superiority of inverting suture lines over everting ones. Experimental studies done over the last century indicate that the single-layer inverting anastomosis recommended by Lembert and Halstead adequately compensates for enteric wound weakness during the lag period. Other techniques of sewing an anastomosis provide no clear advantage. Other factors that incite inflammation also delay enteric wound healing. Debris, necrotic tissue, or infection illicit an inflammatory response with detrimental effects on the anastomosis. Antibiotics, by assisting in the control of infection or by minimizing the size of an inoculum help speed healing. Stapling devices violate many of the doctrines of intestinal suturing. Experimental studies suggest, however, that staple lines incite a minimal inflammatory response. Consequently, wounds closed with stapling devices regain strength more rapidly than those closed with traditional surgical techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Canada)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Golden T, Levy AH, O'Connor WT. Primary healing of skin wounds and incisions with a threadless suture. Am J Surg 1962;104:603–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Dunphy JE, Jackson DS. Practical applications of experimental studies in the care of the primarily closed wound. Am J Surg 1962;104:273–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ordman LJ, Gillman T. Studies in the healing of cutaneous wounds: II. The healing of epidermal, appendageal, and dermal injuries inflicted by suture needles and by the suture materials in the skin of pigs. Arch Surg 1966;93:883–910.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Forrester JC, Zederfeldt BH, Hayes TL, Hunt TK. Tape-closed and sutured wounds: a comparison by tensiometry and scanning electron microscopy. Br J Surg 1970;57:729–37.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Stephens FO, Hunt TK, Dunphy JE. Study of traditional methods of care on the tensile strength of skin wounds in rats. Am J Surg 1971;122:78–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. O'Neil P, Healey JE Jr, Clark RL, Gallager HS. Nonsuture intestinal anastomosis. Am J Surg 1962;104:761–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Weilbaecher DA, Mathieu FJ, Cohn I Jr. Nonsuture intestinal anastomosis. Am J Surg 1964;107:353–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Halstead WS. Ligature and suture material> The employment of fine silk in preference to catgut and the advantage of transfixion of tissues and vessels in control of hemorrhage. Also an account of the introduction of gloves, gutta-percha tissue and silver foil. JAMA 1913;60:1119–26.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Whipple AO. The use of silk in the repair of clean wounds. Ann Surg 1933;98:662–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Shambaugh P, Dunphy JE. Postoperative wound infections and the use of silk: an experimental study. Surgery 1937;1:379–85.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Elkins DC. Wound infection: a comparison of silk and catgut sutures. Ann Surg 1940;112:280–3.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Madsen ET. An experimental and clinical evaluation of surgical suture materials. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1953;97:73–80.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Madsen ET. An experimental and clinical evaluation of surgical suture materials: II. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1953;97:439–44.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Madsen ET. An experimental and clinical evaluation of surgical suture materials: III. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1958;106:216–24.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Adamsons RJ, Musco F, Enquist IF. The comparative effects of silk and catgut on collagen lysis during the lag phase of primary healing. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1965;121:1028–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Alexander JW, Kaplan JZ, Altemeier WA. Role of suture materials in the development of wound infection. Ann Surg 1967;165:192–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Herrmann JB, Kelly RJ, Higgins GA. Polyglycolic acid sutures. Laboratory and clinical evaluation of a new absorbable suture material. Arch Surg 1970;100:485–90.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Van Winkle W Jr. Hastings JC. Considerations in the choice of suture material for various tissues. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1972;135:113–26.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Howes EL, Sooy JW, Harvey SC. The healing of wounds as determined by their tensile strength. JAMA 1929;92:42–45.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Howes EL. The strength of wounds sutured with catgut and silk. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1933;57:309–17.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fellows NM, Burge J, Hatch CS, Price PB. Suture strength and healing strength of end-to-end intestinal anastomoses. Surg Forum 1951;2:111–7.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Adler RH, Montes M, Dayer R, Harrod D. A comparison of reconstituted collagen suture and catgut suture for colon anastomoses. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1967;124:1245–52.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Munday C, McGinn FP. A comparison of polyglycolic acid and catgut sutures in rat colonic anastomoses. Br J Surg 1976;63:870–2.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Deveney KE, Way LW. Effect of different absorbable sutures on healing of gastrointestinal anastomoses. Am J Surg 1977;133:86–94.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lord MG, Broughton AC, Williams HTG. A morphometric study on the effect of suturing the submucosa of the large intestine. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1978;146:211–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Lembert A. Nouveau procede d'enterorraphie. Repertoire General d'Anatome et de Physiologie Pathologique 1826;2:3.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Bronwell AW, Rutledge R, Dalton ML. Single-layer open gastrointestinal anastomosis. Ann Surg 1967;165:925–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Jaffe K. Uber darmresection bei gangranosen hernien. Sammlung Klinischer Vorträge 1883;201:1689–1702.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Halstead WS. Circular suture of the intestine: an experimental study. Am J Med Sci 1887;94:436–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Connell ME. An experimental contribution looking to an improved technique in entorrhaphy, whereby the number of knots is reduced to two, or even one. Medical Record 1892;42:335–7.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gambee L. A single-layer open intestinal anastomosis applicable to the small as well as the large intestine. West J Surg Obstet Gynecol 1951;59:1–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Sako Y, Wangensteen OH. Experimental studies on gastrointestinal anastomoses. Surg Forum 1951;2:117–23.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hamilton JE. Reappraisal of open intestinal anastomoses. Ann Surg 1967;165:917–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Letwin E, Williams HTG. Healing of intestinal anastomosis. Can J Surg 1967;10:109–16.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Buchin R, Van Geertruyden J. Valeur comparees des sutures intestinales en, un plan, et an deux plans. Acta Chir Belg 1960;59:461.

    Google Scholar 

  36. McAdams AJ, Meikle AG, Taylor JO. One layer or two layer colonic anastomoses. Am J Surg 1970;120:546–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Jiborn H, Ahonen J, Zederfeldt B. Healing of experimental colonic anastomoses. The effect of suture technic on collagen concentration in the colon wall. Am J Surg 1978;135:333–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Travers B. An inquiry into the process of Nature in repairing injuries of the intestines: illustrating the treatment of penetrating wounds, and strangulated hernia. London: Longman, Hurst Rees, Orme, and Bacon, 1812.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Bell J. Excision of portions of the intestines. Can Med Surg J 1883;12:1257.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Smith JG. Is the apposition of peritoneum to peritoneum a surgical error? Br Med J 1895;1:1–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Hertzler JH, Tuttle WM. Experimental method for an everting end-to-end anastomosis, in the gastrointestinal tract. Arch Surg 1952;65:398–405.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Healey JE Jr, McBride CM, Gallager HS. Is serosa-to-serosa approximation necessary in intestinal anastomosis? Surg Forum 1964;15:297–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Getzen LC, Roe RD, Holloway CK. Comparative study of intestinal anastomotic healing in inverted and everted closures. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1966;123:1219–27.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Mellish RW, Ty TC, Keller DJ. A study of intestinal healing. J Ped Surg 1968;3:286–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Hargreaves AW, Keddie NC. Colonic anastomosis: a clinical, and experimental study. Br J Surg 1968;55:774–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Gill W, Fraser J, Carter DC, Hill R. Everted intestinal anastomosis. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1969;128:1297–1303.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Irvin TT, Edwards JP. Comparison of single-layer inverting, two-layer inverting and everting anastomoses in the rabbit colon. Br J Surg 1973;60:453–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Abramowitz HB, Butcher HR Jr. Everting and inverting, anastomoses: an experimental study of comparative safety. Am J Surg 1971;121:52–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Loeb MJ. Comparative strength of inverted, everted, and end-on intestinal anastomoses. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1967;125:301–4.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Trueblood HW, Nelsen TS, Kohatsu S, Oberhelman HA. Wound healing in the colon: comparison of inverted and everted closures. Surg 1969;65:919–30.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Arey. Wound healing. Physiol Rev 1936;16:327–406.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Sandbloom P. The tensile strength of healing wounds: an experimental study. Acta Chir Scand 1944;90 (suppl 89):1–108.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Houck JC. The effect of local necrosis upon collagen content of uninjured distal skin. Surgery 1962;51:770–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. DeHaan BS, Ellis H, Wilks M. The role of infection on wound healing. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1974;138:693–700.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Letwin E, Williams HTG, Harrison RC. The experimental healing of soft tissues. J Roy Coll Surg Edinb 1966;12:121–33.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Herrmann JB, Woodward MD, Pulaski J. Healing of colonic anastomoses in the rat. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1964;119:269–75.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Gadacz T, Menguy RB. Effects of anti-inflammatory durg oxyphenbutazone on the rate of wound healing and the biochemical composition of wound tissue. Surg Forum 1967;18:58–60.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Brunius U, Zederfeldt B. Effects of antiinflammatory treatment on wound healing. Acta Chir Scand 1965;129:462–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Coon WW, Upton AC. Histochemical studies of wound healing in scurvy: effects of adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH) and cortisone. Surg Forum 1952;3:493–8.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Haley R, Laws JF. The effect of cortisone on wound healing, blood regeneration and growth. Surg Forum 1952;3:488–93.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Leveen HH, Wapnicks S, Falk D, et al. Effects of prophylactic antibiotics on colonic healing. Am J Surg 1976;131:47–53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Cohn I Jr. Intestinal antisepsis. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1970;130:1006–14.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Irvin TT, Hunt TK. Pathogenesis and prevention of disruption of colonic anastomoses in traumatized rats. Br J Surg 1974;61:437–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Yamakawa T, Patin CS, Sobel S, Morgenstern L. Healing of colonic anastomoses following resection for experimental “diverticulitis.” Arch Surg 1971;103:17–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Dunphy JE. The cut gut. Am J Surg 1970;119:1–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Hawley PR, Faulk P, Hunt TK, Dunphy JE. Collagenase activity in gastro-intestinal tract. Br J Surg 1970;57:896–900.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Stephens FO, Hunt TK. Effect of changes in inspired oxygen and carbon dioxide tensions on wound tensile strength: an experimental study. Ann Surg 1971;173:515–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Hunt TK, Pai MP. The effect of varying ambient oxygen tensions on wound metabolism and collagen synthesis. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1972;135:561–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Rosen RG, Enquist IF. The healing wound in experimental diabetes. Surg 1961;50:525–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Rosenthal S, Lerner B, Dibiase F, Enquist IF. Relation of strength to composition in diabetic wounds. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1962;115:437–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Goodson WH III, Hunt TK. Wound healing in experimental diabetes mellitus: importance of early insulin therapy. Surg Forum 1978;29:94–8.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Dunphy JE, Udupa KN, Edwards LC. Wound healing: a new perspective with particular reference to ascorbic acid deficiency. Ann Surg 1956;144:304–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Adamsons RJ, Musco F, Enquist IF. The relationship of collagen content to wound strength in normal and scorbutic animals. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1964;119:323–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Adamsons RJ, Enquist IF. The relative importance of sutures, to the strength of healing wounds under normal and abnormal conditions. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1963;117:396–401.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Ehrlich HP, Tarver H, Hunt TK. Effects of vitamin A and glucocorticoids upon inflammation and collagen synthesis. Ann Surg 1973;177:222–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Ehrlich HP, Tarver H, Hunt TK. Inhibitory effects of vitamin E on collagen synthesis and wound repair. Ann Surg 1972;175:235–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Hugo NE, Thompson LW, Zook EG, Bennett JE. Effect of chronic anemia on the tensile strength of healing wounds. Surgery 1969;66:741–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Edwards LC, Dunphy JE. Wound healing: I. Injury and normal repair. N Engl J Med 1958;259:224–333.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Van Winkle W Jr. The tensile strength of wounds and factors that influence it. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1962;129:819–42.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Ravitch MM, Steichen FM. Staples in gastrointestinal surgery. In: Maingot R, ed., Abdominal operations. 7th ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1981:2197–2210.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Von Petz A. Zur technik der magenresektion. Ein never magendarmnahapparat. Zentralbe Chir 1924;51:179–89.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Von Petz A. Aseptic technic of stomach resections. Ann Surg 1927;86:388–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Amosov NM, Berezovsky KK. Pulmonary resection with mechanical suture. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1961;41:325–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Rzepecki W, Birecka A, Goralczyk K. Mechanical suture with metallic material in resection of pulmonary tissue (the UKL-60 apparatus). Am Rev Respir Dis 1962;86:798–809.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Gritsman JJ. Mechanical suture, by Soviet apparatus in gastric resection: Use in 4000 operations. Surgery 1966;59:663–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Ravitch MM, Steichen FM, Fishbein RH, Knowles PW, Weil P. Clinical experience with the Soviet mechanical bronchus stapler (UKB-25). J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1964;47:446–54.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Goldman A. An evaluation of automatic suture with UKL-60 and UKL-40 devices by pulmonary resection. Dis Chest 1964;46:29–36.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Betts RH, Takaro T. Use of a lung stapler in pulmonary resection. Ann Thorac Surg 1965;1:197–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Ravitch MM, Rivarola A. Enteroanastomosis with an automatic instrument. Surgery 1966;59:270–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Ravitch MM, Lane R, Cornell WP, Rivarola A, McEnany T. Closure of duodenal gastric and intestinal stumps with wire staples: experimental and clinical studies. Ann Surg 1966;163:573–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Ravitch MM, Rivarola A, Grov JV. Rapid creation, of gastric pouches with the use of an automatic stapling instrument. J Surg Res 1966;6:64–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Steichen FM, Talbert JL, Ravitch MM. Primary side-to-side colorectal anastomosis in the Duhamel operation for Hirschsprung's disease. Surgery 1968;64:475–83.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Smith DE, Karish AF, Chapman JP, Takaro T. Healing of the bronchial stump after pulmonary resection. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1963;46:548–56.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Wilder RJ, Playforth H, Bryant M, Ravitch MM. The use of plastic adhesive in pulmonary surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1963;46:576–88.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Sacks CL. Mechanical aspects of hemostasis with surgical stapling instruments. Ann NY Acad Sci 1964;115:414–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Scott RN, Farac RP, Goodman DG, Militano TC, Geelhoed GW, Chretlem PB. The role of inflammation in bronchial stump healing. Ann Surg 1975;181:381–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Ravitch MM, Rivarola A, Vangrov J. Studies of intestinal healing: I. Preliminary studies of the mechanism of healing of the everting intestinal anastomosis. Johns Hopkins Med J 1967;121:343–8.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Canalis F, Ravitch MM. Study of healing of inverting and everting intestinal anastomoses. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1968;126:109–14.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Ravitch MM, Canalis F, Weinshelbaum A, McCormick J. Studies in intestinal healing: III. Observations on everting intestinal anastomoses. Ann Surg 1967;166:670–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Greenstein A, Rogers P, Moss G. Doubled fourth-day colorectal anastomotic strength with complete retention of intestinal mature wound collagen and accelerated deposition following full enteral nutrition. Surg Forum 1978;29:78–81.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, St. Luke's Hospital, 707 17th Street S.E., 55904, Cleveland, Ohio

    Garth H. Ballantyne M.D.

Authors
  1. Garth H. Ballantyne M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

About this article

Cite this article

Ballantyne, G.H. The experimental basis of intestinal suturing. Dis Colon Rectum 27, 61–71 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02554084

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02554084

Key words

Search

Navigation