Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Prospective, randomized trial of the biofragmentable anastomosis ring. The BAR Investigational Group.

Authors: M P, Bubrick; M L, Corman; C J, Cahill; T G, Hardy; F C, Nance; C H, Shatney;

Prospective, randomized trial of the biofragmentable anastomosis ring. The BAR Investigational Group.

Abstract

A randomized trial was undertaken to compare the biofragmental anastomotic ring (BAR) with conventional intraperitoneal colorectal anastomotic techniques. Patients were randomized into one of two schemes: BAR versus sutured or BAR versus stapled anastomosis. There were 782 patients entered into the study and 283 patients (36%) had a sutured anastomosis, 104 patients (13%) had a stapled anastomosis, and 395 (51%) had the BAR. Comparison of the BAR with combined suture and stapled controls revealed no significant differences in wound complication, abscess rate, bleeding, anastomotic leaks, ileus, obstruction, or deaths. There were no differences in return of bowel function, return to normal diet, or hospital stay. Intraoperative difficulties occurred in 46 BAR patients (17%), and this was significantly higher (p less than 0.001) than for sutured (3%) but not for stapled anastomoses (11%). The occurrence of these problems did not adversely effect the outcome. The data suggest that the BAR is a safe, satisfactory alternative to sutured or stapled colorectal anastomoses.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Male, Adolescent, Anastomosis, Surgical, Length of Stay, Middle Aged, Intestines, Postoperative Complications, Preoperative Care, Humans, Female, Prospective Studies, Aged

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    85
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
85
Top 10%
Top 1%
Top 10%
Related to Research communities
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!