2022
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-022-06110-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mechanism of Staple Line Leak After Sleeve Gastrectomy via Isobaric Pressurisation Concentrating Stress Forces at the Proximal Staple Line

Abstract: Purpose Staple line leak following sleeve gastrectomy is a significant problem and has been hypothesised to be related to hyperpressurisation in the proximal stomach. There is, however, little objective evidence demonstrating how these forces could be transmitted to the luminal wall. We aimed to define conditions in the proximal stomach and simulate the transmission of stress forces in the post-operative stomach using a finite element analysis (FEA). Materials and Metho… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 29 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Importantly, 50% of patients who had an eroded gastric band prior to RLSG experienced a sleeve leak. The higher leak rates observed in RLSG could potentially be attributable to a lower threshold for disruption of the staple line from isobaric pressurisation due to the thickened tissue around the cardia and fundus, the formation of a fibrotic capsule at the site of the band and lastly, interrupted blood supply with frayed, thinned luminal wall [ 24 , 25 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Importantly, 50% of patients who had an eroded gastric band prior to RLSG experienced a sleeve leak. The higher leak rates observed in RLSG could potentially be attributable to a lower threshold for disruption of the staple line from isobaric pressurisation due to the thickened tissue around the cardia and fundus, the formation of a fibrotic capsule at the site of the band and lastly, interrupted blood supply with frayed, thinned luminal wall [ 24 , 25 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%