Skip to main content
Log in

Anastomosentechniken in der minimal-invasiven bariatrischen Chirurgie

Anastomotic techniques in minimally invasive bariatric surgery

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Die Chirurgie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Empfehlungen zur Anwendung bestimmter Anastomosentechniken liegen in der laparoskopischen bariatrischen Chirurgie nicht vor. Empfehlungskriterien sollten die Raten an Insuffizienzen, Blutungen, die Neigung zur Striktur oder Ulzeration wie auch den Einfluss auf die Gewichtsabnahme oder Dumping berücksichtigen.

Fragestellung

Es soll eine Übersicht über die vorliegende Evidenz bezüglich Anastomosentechniken typischer Operationsverfahren in der laparoskopischen bariatrischen Chirurgie gegeben werden.

Material und Methoden

Es erfolgte eine Auswertung und Diskussion der aktuellen Literatur bezüglich Techniken der Anastomosierung beim Roux-en-Y-Magenbypass (RYGB), beim One-anastomosis-gastric-Bypass (OAGB), beim Single-anastomosis-sleeve-ileal-Bypass (SASI) und bei der biliopankreatischen Diversion mit duodenalem Switch (BPD-DS).

Ergebnisse

Es existieren, bis auf den RYGB, wenig komparative Studien. Bei der Gastrojejunostomie des RYGB zeigte sich die komplette Handnaht der mechanischen Anastomose ebenbürtig. Zudem zeigten sich leicht Vorteile der linearen Klammernaht gegenüber dem Zirkularstapler in Bezug auf Wundinfektionen und Blutungen. Die Anastomosentechnik des OAGB und SASI kann vollständig mit Linearstapler oder mit Nahtverschluss des Vorderwanddefekts erfolgen. Bei der BPD-DS scheint es einen Vorteil der Handanastomose zu geben.

Schlussfolgerungen

Aufgrund der fehlenden Evidenz können keine Empfehlungen gegeben werden. Lediglich beim RYGB zeigte sich ein Vorteil der linearen Staplertechnik mit Handverschluss des Staplerdefekts gegenüber dem Linearstapler. Prinzipiell sind prospektive, randomisierte Studien anzustreben.

Abstract

Background

Recommendations for the use of specific anastomotic techniques are not available in laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Recommendation criteria should consider the rate of insufficiency, bleeding, tendency to stricture or ulceration as well as the impact on weight loss or dumping.

Objective

This article gives a review of the available evidence on the anastomotic techniques of typical surgical procedures in laparoscopic bariatric surgery.

Material and methods

The current literature was reviewed and is discussed regarding anastomotic techniques for Roux-en‑Y gastric bypass (RYGB), one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), single anastomosis sleeve ileal (SASI) bypass and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD-DS).

Results

Few comparative studies exist, except for the RYGB. In RYGB gastrojejunostomy, a complete manual suture was shown to be equivalent to a mechanical anastomosis. In addition, the linear staple suture showed slight advantages over the circular stapler in terms of wound infections and bleeding. The anastomosis technique of the OAGB and SASI can be performed entirely with a linear stapler or with suture closure of the anterior wall defect. There seems to be an advantage of manual anastomosis in BPD-DS.

Conclusion

Due to the lack of evidence, no recommendations can be made. Only in RYGB was there an advantage of the linear stapler technique with hand closure of the stapler defect compared to the linear stapler. In principle, prospective, randomized studies should be strived for.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4

Literatur

  1. Wittgrove AC, Clark GW, Tremblay LJ (1994) Laparoscopic gastric bypass, Roux-en-Y: preliminary report of five cases. Obes Surg 4(4):353–357

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Griffen WO Jr, Young VL, Stevenson CC (1977) A prospective comparison of gastric and jejunoileal bypass procedures for morbid obesity

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Viszeral- und Allgemeinchirurgie e. V. (2018) S3-Leitlinie Chirurgie der Adipositas und metabolischen Erkrankungen (Registernummer 088-011)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bhandari M, Fobi MAL, Buchwald JN, Bariatric Metabolic Surgery Standardization (BMSS) Working Group (2019) Standardization of bariatric metabolic procedures: world consensus meeting statement. Obes Surg 29(4):309–345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jiang HP, Lin LL, Jiang X, Qiao HQ (2016) Meta-analysis of hand-sewn versus mechanical gastrojejunal anastomosis during laparoscopic Roux-en‑Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity. Int J Surg 32:150–157

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Edholm D (2019) Systematic review and meta-analysis of circular- and linear-stapled gastro-jejunostomy in laparoscopic Roux-en‑Y gastric bypass. Obes Surg 29(6):1946–1953

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Vitiello A, Berardi G, Velotti N, Schiavone V, Manetti C, Musella M (2022) Linear versus circular laparoscopic gastrojejunal anastomosis of roux-en‑Y gastric bypass: systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 comparative studies. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 32(3):393–398

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Markar SR, Penna M, Venkat-Ramen V, Karthikesalingam A, Hashemi M (2012) Influence of circular stapler diameter on postoperative stenosis after laparoscopic gastrojejunal anastomosis in morbid obesity. Surg Obes Relat Dis 8(2):230–235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sima E, Hedberg J, Sundbom M (2016) Gastrointestinal symptoms, weight loss and patient satisfaction 5 years after gastric bypass: a study of three techniques for the gastrojejunal anastomosis. Surg Endosc 30(4):1553–1558

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Schneider R, Gass JM, Kern B, Peters T, Slawik M, Gebhart M, Peterli R (2016) Linear compared to circular stapler anastomosis in laparoscopic Roux-en‑Y gastric bypass leads to comparable weight loss with fewer complications: a matched pair study. Langenbecks Arch Surg 401(3):307–313

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Munoz-Flores F, Rodriguez-Quintero JH, Pechman D, Creange C, Zenilman A, Choi J, Moran-Atkin E, Lima DL, Camacho D (2022) Weight loss one year after laparoscopic roux-en‑Y gastric bypass is not dependent on the type of gastrojejunal anastomosis. Surg Endosc 36(1):787–792

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fehervari M, Alyaqout K, Lairy A, Khwaja H, Bonanomi G, Efthimiou E (2021) Gastrojejunal anastomotic technique. Does it matter? Weight loss and weight regain 5 years after laparoscopic Roux-en‑Y gastric bypass. Obes Surg 31(1):267–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kumar P, Yau HV, Trivedi A, Yong D, Mahawar K (2020) Global variations in practices concerning Roux-en‑Y gastric bypass-an online survey of 651 bariatric and metabolic surgeons with cumulative experience of 158,335 procedures. Obes Surg 30(11):4339–4351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rutledge R, Kular K, Manchanda N (2019) The mini-gastric bypass original technique. Int J Surg 61:38–41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Apers J, Wijkmans R, Totte E, Emous M (2018) Implementation of mini gastric bypass in the Netherlands: early and midterm results from a high-volume unit. Surg Endosc 32(9):3949–3955

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rutledge R (2001) The mini-gastric bypass: experience with the first 1,274 cases. obes surg 11(3):276–280

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kassir R, Giudicelli X, Lointier P, Breton C, Blanc P (2021) Omega loop gastroileal bypass (OLGIBP/SAGI) versus one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB): medium-term results. Obes Surg 31(4):1597–1602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-020-05165-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ramos AC, Chevallier JM, Mahawar K, Brown W, Kow L, White KP, Shikora S, Contributors ICC (2020) IFSO (international federation for surgery of obesity and metabolic disorders) consensus conference statement on one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB-MGB): results of a modified Delphi study. Obes Surg 30(5):1625–1634

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mahdy T, Al Wahedi A, Schou C (2016) Efficacy of single anastomosis sleeve ileal (SASI) bypass for type‑2 diabetic morbid obese patients: gastric bipartition, a novel metabolic surgery procedure: a retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg 34:28–34

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Emile SH, Madyan A, Mahdy T, Elshobaky A, Elbanna HG, Abdel-Razik MA (2021) Single anastomosis sleeve ileal (SASI) bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy: a case-matched multicenter study. Surg Endosc 35(2):652–660

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Khrucharoen U, Juo YY, Chen Y, Dutson EP (2020) Indications, operative techniques, and outcomes for revisional operation following mini-gastric bypass-one anastomosis gastric bypass: a systematic review. Obes Surg 30(4):1564–1573

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mahdy T, Emile SH, Madyan A, Schou C, Alwahidi A, Ribeiro R, Sewefy A, Busing M, Al-Haifi M, Salih E, Shikora S (2020) Evaluation of the efficacy of single anastomosis sleeve ileal (SASI) bypass for patients with morbid obesity: a multicenter study. Obes Surg 30(3):837–845

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kermansaravi M, Kabir A, Pazouki A (2020) 1‑year follow-up of single anastomosis sleeve ileal (SASI) bypass in morbid obese patients: efficacy and concerns. Obes Surg 30(11):4286–4292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-020-04781-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hess DS, Hess DW (1998) Biliopancreatic diversion with a duodenal switch. Obes Surg 8(3):267–282

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Marceau P, Hould FS, Simard S, Lebel S, Bourque RA, Potvin M, Biron S (1998) Biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch. World J Surg 22(9):947–954

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ren CJ, Patterson E, Gagner M (2000) Early results of laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch: a case series of 40 consecutive patients. Obes Surg 10(6):514–523 (discussion 524)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Baltasar A, Bou R, Bengochea M, Arlandis F, Escrivá C, Miró J, Martínez R, Pérez N (2001) Duodenal switch: an effective therapy for morbid obesity—intermediate results. Obes Surg 11(1):54–58

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Weiner RA, Blanco-Engert R, Weiner S, Pomhoff I, Schramm M (2004) Laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch: three different duodeno-ileal anastomotic techniques and initial experience. Obes Surg 14(3):334–340

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Biertho L, Simon-Hould F, Marceau S, Lebel S, Lescelleur O, Biron S (2016) Current outcomes of laparoscopic duodenal switch. Ann Surg Innov Res 10:1

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Finno P, Osorio J, García-Ruiz-de-Gordejuela A, Casajoana A, Sorribas M, Admella V, Serrano M, Marchesini JB, Ramos AC, Pujol-Gebellí J (2020) Single versus double-anastomosis duodenal switch: single-site comparative cohort study in 440 consecutive patients. Obes Surg 30(9):3309–3316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arne Dietrich.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

U.G. Lange, M. Mehdorn und A. Dietrich geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autor/-innen keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Additional information

Redaktion

U. Settmacher, Jena

figure qr

QR-Code scannen & Beitrag online lesen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lange, U.G., Mehdorn, M. & Dietrich, A. Anastomosentechniken in der minimal-invasiven bariatrischen Chirurgie. Chirurgie 94, 768–774 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-023-01907-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-023-01907-9

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation