Log in

Relationship between functional end-to-end anastomosis for colon cancer and surgical site infections

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgery Today Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Surgical site infections (SSI) are a common complication of gastrointestinal tract surgery. In this study, we explored the correlation between the anastomosis method and the incidence of SSI.

Methods

A total of 110 patients underwent ileocecal resection or right hemicolectomy for the excision of colon cancer. Two methods (open and closed, 28 and 82 patients, respectively) of functional end-to-end anastomosis were adopted.

Results

Increased perioperative blood loss (p = 0.029214), a longer hospital stay (p = 0.026668) and the development of SSI (p = 0.000181) were significantly correlated with the open method. There was no correlation between SSI and the body mass index, or between SSI and the length of the surgery or diabetes mellitus. However, patients that developed SSI tended to be obese.

Conclusion

The open method was associated with a higher incidence of SSI. Therefore, it is necessary to consider potential contamination of the surgical field at the time of anastomosis to reduce the incidence of SSI.

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

Access this article

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 excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Choy PY, Bissett IP, Docherty JG, et al. Stapled versus handsewn methods for ileocolic anastomoses. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;9:Cd004320.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Shelygin YA, Chernyshov SV, Rybakov EG. Stapled ileostomy closure results in reduction of postoperative morbidity. Tech Coloproctol. 2010;14:19–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wittgrove AC, Clark GW. Laparoscopic gastric bypass, Roux-en-Y- 500 patients: technique and results, with 3–60 month follow-up. Obes Surg. 2000;10:233–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ostericher R, Lally KP, Barrett DM, et al. Anastomotic obstruction after stapled enteroanastomosis. Surgery. 1991;109:799–801.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ritchey ML, Lally KP, Ostericher R. Comparison of different techniques of stapled bowel anastomoses in a canine model. Arch Surg. 1993;128:1365–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, et al. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1990;20:250–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Anderson DJ, Kaye KS, Classen D, et al. Strategies to prevent surgical site infections in acute care hospitals. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2008;29(Suppl 1):S51–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Healey MA, Shackford SR, Osler TM, et al. Complications in surgical patients. Arch Surg. 2002;137:611–7; discussion 7–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hardacre JM, Mendoza-Sagaon M, Murata K, et al. Use of a cauterizing laparoscopic linear stapler in intestinal anastomosis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2000;10:128–32; discussion 33-4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ravitch MM, Steichen FM. A stapling instrument for end-to-end inverting anastomoses in the gastrointestinal tract. Ann Surg. 1979;189:791–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Steichen FM, Ravitch MM. Mechanical sutures in surgery. Br J Surg. 1973;60:191–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Steichen FM. The use of staplers in anatomical side-to-side and functional end-to-end enteroanastomoses. Surgery. 1968;64:948–53.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sameshima S, Koketsu S, Yoneyama S, et al. Outcome of functional end-to-end anastomosis following right hemicolectomy. Int Surg. 2009;94:249–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hagihara M, Suwa M, Ito Y, et al. Preventing surgical-site infections after colorectal surgery. J Infect Chemother. 2012;8:83–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Itani KM, Jensen EH, Finn TS, et al. Effect of body mass index and ertapenem versus cefotetan prophylaxis on surgical site infection in elective colorectal surgery. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2008;9:131–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Imai E, Ueda M, Kanao K, et al. Surgical site infection risk factors identified by multivariate analysis for patient undergoing laparoscopic, open colon, and gastric surgery. Am J Infect Control. 2008;36:727–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kurmann A, Vorburger SA, Candinas D, et al. Operation time and body mass index are significant risk factors for surgical site infection in laparoscopic sigmoid resection: a multicenter study. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:3531–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. McConnell YJ, Johnson PM, Porter GA, et al. Surgical site infections following colorectal surgery in patients with diabetes: association with postoperative hyperglycemia. J Gastrointest Surg. 2009;13:508–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sehgal R, Berg A, Figueroa R, et al. Risk factors for surgical site infections after colorectal resection in diabetic patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212:29–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

Hitoshi Ojima and co-authors have no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hitoshi Ojima.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ojima, H., Sohda, M., Ando, H. et al. Relationship between functional end-to-end anastomosis for colon cancer and surgical site infections. Surg Today 45, 1489–1492 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-015-1110-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-015-1110-x

Keywords

Navigation