Abstract:This meta‐analysis demonstrates no improvement in anastomotic leak outcomes with the approach to anastomosis. Stapled anastomosis was associated with a pooled reduction in the odds of composite anastomotic complication in trauma patients. However, the foundation for these results is based on lower quality studies. Background Approach to enteric anastomotic technique has been a subject of debate, with no clear consensus as to whether handsewn or stapled techniques are superior in trauma settings, which are influenced by unique perturbances to important processes such as immune function, coagulation, wound healing and response to infection. This systematic review and meta‐analysis compares the risk of anastomotic complications in trauma patients with gastrointestinal injury requiring restoration of continuity with handsewn versus staples approaches. Methods A comprehensive computer assisted search of electronic databases Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central was performed. Comparative studies evaluating stapled versus handsewn gastrointestinal anastomoses in trauma patients were included in this review. All anastomoses involving small intestine to small intestine, small to large intestine, and large intestine to large intestine were eligible. Anastomosis to the rectum was excluded. Outcomes evaluated were (1) anastomotic leak (AL) (2) a composite anastomotic complication (CAC) end point consisting of AL, enterocutaneous fistula (ECF) and deep abdominal abscess. Results Eight studies involving 931 patients were included and of these patients, data from 790 patients were available for analysis. There was no significant difference identified for anastomotic leak between the two groups (OR = 0.77; 95% CI 0.24–2.45; P = 0.66). There was no significant improvement in composite anastomotic complication; defined as a composite of anastomotic leak, deep intra‐abdominal abscess and intra‐abdominal fistula, in the stapled anastomosis group (OR = 1.05; 95% CI 0.53–2.09; P = 0.90). Overall, there was limited evidence to suggest superiority with handsewn or stapled anastomosis for improving AL or CAC, however this was based on studies of moderate to high risk of bias with poor control for confounders. Discussion This meta‐analysis demonstrates no superiority improvement in anastomotic outcomes with handsewn or stapled repair. These findings may represent no effect in anastomotic outcome by technique for all situations. However, considering the paucity of information on potential confounders, perhaps there is a difference in outcome with overall technique or for specific subgroups that have not been described due to limited sample size and data on confounders. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to recommend an anastomotic technique in trauma.

Does Tri‐StapleTM technology reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery? A propensity score matching analysis

The effect of reinforcing sutures and trans-anal drainage tube on the outcome of laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: propensity score‑matched analysis

A Retrospective Analysis of a Propensity-Matched Cohort

Anastomotic leak after manual circular stapled left-sided bowel surgery: analysis of technology-, disease-, and patient-related factors

Double-stapled anastomosis without “dog-ears” reduces the anastomotic leakage in laparoscopic anterior resection of rectal cancer: A prospective, randomized, controlled study

Two-row, three-row or powered circular stapler, which to choose when performing colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Stapled Trans-anal Rectal Resection Using Single Versus Double Stapler in Surgical Management of Obstructed Defecation: A Randomised Clinical Trial

Suspension and Suturing Technique Can Reduce the Incidence of Anastomotic Leakage after Rectal Cancer Excision: a Single, Prospective, Cohort Study

IDEAL Stage 2a/b prospective cohort study of transanal transection and single-stapled anastomosis for rectal cancer

The impact of stapled compared to handsewn repair on anastomotic outcomes in trauma patients: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Short-term outcomes of delta-shaped anastomosis versus functional end-to-end anastomosis using linear staplers for colon cancer

Effect of intraoperative anastomotic reinforcement suture on the prevention of anastomotic leakage of double-stapling anastomosis for laparoscopic rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Stapled Anastomosis Versus Hand-Sewn Anastomosis With Mucosectomy for Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Postoperative Outcomes, Functional Outcomes, and Oncological Safety

A Novel Knotless Hand-Sewn End-to-end Anastomosis Using V-loc Barbed Suture Vs. Stapled Anastomosis in Laparoscopic Left Colonic Surgery: A Propensity Scoring Match Analysis

Systemic Assessment of Manual Circular Stapler Versus Powered Circular Stapler for Anastomosis in Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Low anterior resection with transanal transection and single-stapled anastomosis: technical aspects and initial results

The Comparisons of Three Stapler Placement Methods for Intrathoracic Mechanistic Circular Stapling in Ivor Lewis Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.

Pilot Study on Preventing Anastomotic Leakage in Stapled Gastroesophageal Anastomosis

Anastomosis oversewing technique to prevent leakage after oesophagectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis

Effect of Different Reinforcement Methods on Anastomotic Leakage Prevention after Laparoscopic Double Anastomosis.

Transanal drainage tube placement to prevent anastomotic leakage following colorectal cancer surgery with double stapling reconstruction