Intestinal Sleeve Anastomosis: A Comparative Study with End-to-End Anastomosis

This study examines the utility of a sleeve anastomosis with comparison to conventional end to end anastomosis. Thirty New Zealand white rabbits were randomized to sleeve (n = 15) or end-to-end (n = 15) small bowel anastomosis. Five rabbits of each group were sacrificed at 3 days, 7 days, and 6 weeks. Anastomoses were assessed for integrity, bursting strength, and stenosis and examined histologically. Ten control specimens of small bowel were tested for bursting pressure. Three rabbits died postoperatively (1 sleeve and 2 end-to-end). A fourth rabbit (sleeve) was sacrificed early at 3 weeks and had a total stenosis at the anastomosis. The remaining 26 rabbits were reoperated at the prescribed times. There was no evidence of infection or dehiscence in any of these rabbits. Both end-to-end and sleeve anastomoses were equivalent for bursting pressure at all times and, at 7 days and 6 weeks, were similar to controls. The stenotic index revealed no evidence of proximal dilation suggestive of obstruction in the 26 rabbits. For sleeve anastomoses the length of the projected bowel into the lumen persisted at the 6-week stage. Histologically there was good evidence of healing in both the sleeve and end-to-end anstomoses and the serosal surface of the sleeved bowel had epithelialized. Sleeve anastomosis has been demonstrated to heal well and to be as strong as conventional end-to-end anastomosis. Further studies are warranted to determine its role in intestinal anastomosis and potential as a valve.