Efficacy of stapler pharyngeal closure after total laryngectomy: A systematic review

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
29
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2014
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
WILEY-BLACKWELL
Autores
AIRES, Felipe T.
CASTRO, Mario Augusto F.
BERNARDO, Wanderley Marques
Citação
HEAD AND NECK-JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENCES AND SPECIALTIES OF THE HEAD AND NECK, v.36, n.5, p.739-742, 2014
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Background Some primary studies compare manual and mechanical pharyngeal closures after total laryngectomy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the advantages of the mechanical suture in pharyngeal closure. Methods The literature survey included research in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS. The intervention analyzed was stapler-assisted pharyngeal closure, whereas the control group was manual suture pharyngeal closure. Results The survey resulted in 319 studies. However, 4 studies were selected (417 patients). In the group of patients in whom the stapler was used, the incidence of pharyngocutaneous fistula was 8.7%, whereas in the other, it was 22.9%, with an absolute risk reduction of 15% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.28; p = .02; I-2 = 66%). Regarding the surgical time, the average difference was 80 minutes in favor of the stapler group (95% CI, 23.16-136.58 minutes; p < .006). Conclusion The difference for starting oral feeding was 8 days in favor of the mechanical suture (95% CI, 4.01-11.73 days; p < .001). Patients who underwent mechanical suture had a shorter hospitalization period. (c) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 36: 739-742, 2014
Palavras-chave
surgical staplers, laryngectomy, suture techniques, cutaneous fistula, meta-analysis
Referências
  1. Ahsan F, 2008, J LARYNGOL OTOL, V122, P1245, DOI 10.1017/S0022215108003228
  2. Altissimi G, 2007, Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital, V27, P118
  3. Bedrin L, 2005, HEAD NECK-J SCI SPEC, V27, P1073, DOI 10.1002/hed.20280
  4. Calli C, 2011, ANN OTO RHINOL LARYN, V120, P339
  5. Dedivitis R A, 2007, Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital, V27, P2
  6. Dedivitis RA, 2013, ACTA OTORHI IN PRESS
  7. Dedivitis RA, 2004, ACTA CIR BRAS, V19, P66
  8. Goncalves AJ, 2009, EUR ARCH OTO-RHINO-L, V266, P1793, DOI 10.1007/s00405-009-0945-4
  9. HOEHN JG, 1969, MAYO CLIN PROC, V44, P738
  10. Lukyianchenko AG, 1973, VESTN OTORHINOLARING, V33, P29
  11. Santaolalla Montoya F, 2002, ACTA OTORRINOLARINGO, V53, P343
  12. Simoncelli C, 1990, Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital, V10, P465
  13. WESTMORE GA, 1983, J LARYNGOL OTOL, V97, P775, DOI 10.1017/S0022215100094974