Comparison of Single Layer Interrupted Extra Mucosal Intestinal Anastomosis with the Double Layer Conventional Methods of Intestinal Anastomosis at People’s Medical College Hospital Nawabshah.

Abstract

Objective: -. To evaluate the safety of single layer interrupted extra mucosal intestinal anastomosis in comparison with the double layer conventional methods of intestinal anastomosis at people’s medical college hospital Nawabshah.

Methodology:  A cross sectional study at Peoples Medical college Hospital Nawabshah SBA Pakistan included 90 patients aged (18-60 years) to intestinal anastomosis between two groups with different patterns. Variables like pain. Leakage of anastomosis, infections and others were recorded and analysed.

Study design: Cross sectional study.

Place & Duration of study:  This study was conducted at  Department of Surgery PUMHSW Nawabshah Surgical Unit-1 of PMC Hospital Nawabshah Pakistan, duration  from January  2024 to December 2025.

Results: In my study, Resection and ileo-ileal anastomosis was done in 17(19%) in Group A and 20(22%) in Group B. Resection and jejune-ileal anastomosis was done in 9(10%) in Group A and 7(8%) in Group B. Right hemicolectomy and ileo-transverse anastomosis was done in 8(9%) in Group A and 8(9%) in Group B. Limited resection and ileo-colic anastomosis was done in 8(9%) in Group A and 8(9%) in Group B. Left hemicolectomy and colo-colic anastomosis was done in 3(3%) in Group A and 2(2%) in Group B.  Intra-abdominal abscess / collection was seen in 1(1.1%) in Group A and 1(1.1%) in Group B. Fistula was seen in 3(3.3%) in Group A and 3(3.3%) in Group B. Intestinal Obstruction was found in 3(3.3%) in Group A and 2(2.2%) in Group B. Anastomosis leak  found in 3(3.3%) in Group A and 3(3.3%) in Group B. 32(36%) patients stayed for 1-7 days, 35(39%) for 8-15 days, 12(13%) for 16-20 days and 11(12%) for >20 days.

Conclusion: - In short it can be concluded that double layered interrupted anastomosis has good results as compared to single layer continuous. Group B has lower complication rate as compared to Group A. Frequency of patients was equal in both groups. Therefore, it is evident that Group B has superiority over Group A in all.