• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Why Should You Support SAGES?
    • SAGES Swag
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Annual Meeting
      • 2027 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2027 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Lead Up Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • Innovative Surgical Trends
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Advanced Laparoscopy and Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
    • Foregut Video Atlas
  • Opportunities
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs
  • Learning Hub
You are here: Home / Abstracts / The Optimal Technique of Gastrojejunostomy in Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass May Be a Hand Sewn Anastomosis. Comparison of Outcomes and Costs.

The Optimal Technique of Gastrojejunostomy in Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass May Be a Hand Sewn Anastomosis. Comparison of Outcomes and Costs.

Piotr Gorecki, MD FACS, Krystyna Kabata, PA, Srikanth Eathiraju, MD, Suraj Parekh, MD, Anthony Tortolani, MD. NEW YORK METHODIST HOSPITAL

 

Introduction: Creation of gastrojejunostomy during laparoscopic gastric bypass remains technically challenging part of the procedure. The techniques utilized include: circular stapled anastomosis (CSA), linear stapled anastomosis (LSA), and hand sewn anastomosis (HSA). No consensus on optimal technique exists and individual surgeon’s training and personal preferences are main determinants behind the choice of method.

Methods: We compare the outcomes of 434 consecutive patients who underwent a CSA with 218 consecutive patients who underwent HSA. All patients were approached with laparoscopic technique and were performed by the same surgeon (PG) at a single institution (NYMH). All patients followed the same clinical pathways for perioperative care. All data were collected and entered into the data base prospectively. The two groups were compared for the following patient variables: mean preoperative weight, BMI, age, sex, insurance status and number of comorbidities.

Main outcome measures: Perioperative outcomes included: operative times, intra-operative blood loss, length of hospital stay and utilization of post discharge prescription pain medications. Complications included mortalities, anastomotic leaks, wound infections, incisional hernias, GI bleeding, 30-day reoperations and anastomotic strictures. Hospital costs were calculated based on a sample of the most recent 100 consecutive patients in each technique group. Financial information included: costs of disposable instrumentation, total hospital charges and hospital charges to reimbursement ratio. The dynamics of postoperative weight and BMI loss were also evaluated. Pearson Chi-Square and t-test were utilized for statistical analysis.

Results: Groups were comparable preoperatively (mean BMI in CSA group 48.34 vs. 47.61 in HSA group, p=0.178). All operations were completed laparoscopicaly and there were no major intraoperative complications and no intraoperative blood transfusions in either group. There was a shorter operating time in the HSA group (HSA group, 150.87 min vs. CSA group, 179.89 min, p<0.001) and less blood loss in the HSA group (17.19 cc vs. 44.95 cc.). Patients in the HSA group had shorter mean hospital stay (2.47 vs.3.45 days, p<0.001) and less utilization of prescription pain medications (2.84 vs. 7.43 days, p<0.001). There was no postoperative mortality and no leaks in the HSA group (3 leaks in CSA group). There were no wound infections in HSA group (HSA 0% vs. CSA, 17 patients, 3.92%), and no postoperative GI hemorrhage in HSA group (0% vs.3.7%). There were 8 (1.84%) 30-day reoperations in CSA group (5-laprotomy, 3- laparoscopy, 7 potentially related to utilization of staple products) and 3 reoperations (1.36%) in the HSA group (all 3 – laparoscopy, none related to HSA technique). The incidence of anastomotic strictures was similar in both groups (HSA 5.5% vs. 6.9% in CSA group). HSA provided significant costs saving ($1004.03 saving in disposable instrumentation per patient) and 33.06% improvement in hospital charges to reimbursement ratio. The dynamics of weight loss, and 1-year excess weight loss were similar in both groups (1 year BMI 31.27 in CSA vs. BMI 31.69 in HSA, p=0.483)

Conclusions: HSA appears to be a less expensive and safer method as compared to CSA and therefore may be the preferred technique of laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy during laparoscopic gastric bypass.
 


Session Number: Poster – Poster Presentations
Program Number: P496
View Poster

Related



Hours & Info

15821 Ventura Blvd Ste 400
Encino, CA 91436

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2026 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals

Refine Search