Barbed Versus Usual Suture for Closure of the Gastrojejunal Anastomosis in Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass: a Comparative Trial

• Published in: Obesity surgery Vol. 23; no. 1; pp. 60 - 63
• Main Authors: De Blasi, Vito, Facy, Olivier, Goergen, Martine, Poulain, Virginie, De Magistris, Luigi, Azagra, Juan Santiago
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York Springer-Verlag 01.01.2013; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Adult; Anastomosis, Roux-en-Y - adverse effects; Anastomosis, Roux-en-Y - methods; Anastomotic Leak - etiology; Anastomotic Leak - prevention & control; Anastomotic Leak - surgery; Body Mass Index; Clinical Research; Comparative studies; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Equipment Design; Female; Gastrointestinal surgery; Humans; Jejunum - physiopathology; Jejunum - surgery; Laparoscopy; Male; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Obesity; Obesity, Morbid - physiopathology; Obesity, Morbid - surgery; Postoperative Complications; Reproducibility of Results; Retrospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Surgery; Surgical techniques; Suture Techniques; Sutures; Treatment Outcome; Laparoscopy; Barbed suture; Bariatric surgery; Gastric bypass
• ISSN: 0960-8923; 1708-0428
• DOI: 10.1007/s11695-012-0763-4

Background Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is one of the main bariatric procedures that require safe and reproducible anastomosis. The objective of this study is to compare the risk of leaks and stenosis of a mechanical gastric pouch jejunal anastomosis between the usual interrupted sutures and a continuous barbed suture for gastrojejunotomy, in order to reduce procedure time and costs. Methods A comparative trial of 100 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was performed between October 2010 and July 2011. The population was divided into two groups of 50 consecutive patients. In the first group, gastrojejunotomy was sutured with resorbable interrupted sutures and the second with continuous barbed suture. Diabetes, body mass index and the American Society of Anaesthesiology score were compared. The time required for suturing and the incidence of anastomotic leaks and stricture were also compared after 6 months. Results No fistulas or anastomotic stenoses had occurred at post-operative month 6 in either group. Gastrojejunotomy suture time was significantly shorter in the barbed suture group (11 versus 8.22 min; p  < 0.01). Total costs of material to complete the reconstruction were significantly lower in the barbed suture group (€26.69 versus €18.33; p  < 0.001). Conclusions The use of barbed suture is as safe as usual sutures and allows easier and faster suture in the closure of gastrojejunotomy. This suture could be incorporated in the standard laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass technique.