J. R. Coll. Surg. Edinb., 43, February 1998, 3132
Stapler failure in pharyngeal diverticulectomy: a suggested modification in surgical technique
H. KUBBA AND S. S. MUSHEERHUSSAIN
Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Freeman
Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, England
The use of a mechanical stapling device during excision of a pharyngeal pouch is now becoming more common, and has many adyantages including less contamination of the wound by pharyngeal contents and a shorter operating time. The manufacturers recommend dividing the neck of the pouch flush with the stapler before removing the stapler. We report a case where the stapler failed, leaving a large defect in the pharyngeal wall necessitating a hand sutured closure. We recommend a change in practice: an artery forcep is applied across the pouch distal to the stapler, the stapler is then removed and the staple line inspected before dividing the pouch.
Keywords: pharyngeal pouch/diverticulum, stapler, surgical technique
Pharyngeal pouch (Zenkers diverticulum) is a pulsion diverticulum which originates from Killians dehiscence between the cricopharyngeus and thyropharyngeus muscles. The incidence rises with age and it is twice as common in men. The cardinal symptoms being dysphagia and regurgitation.1
Options for treatment include diverticulopexy with cricopharyngeal myotomy2 and endoscopic diverticulotomy3 which is most easily accomplished with a stapling device.4 For the majority of patients, however, excision of the pouch through an incision in the neck is the treatment of choice, usually combined with a cricopharyngeal myotomy.5 The use of a mechanical stapling device to close the neck of the diverticulum was suggested more than 25 years ago5 to protect the wound from contamination by pharyngeal contents, and also to shorten the operating time for patients who are often old and frail. Mechanical staplers are now commonly used in diverticulectomy, and a number of authors have reported good results.6-12
Staplers are widely used in many surgical specialities and are reliable and accurate. True technical failures of the instrument have been encountered only rarely, and problems with staplers are usually attributed to improper use of the instrument.13 There have been reports, however, of devices failing to staple the pulmonary artery completely during thoracoscopic pulmonary lobectomy, leading to life-threatening haemorrhage.14,15 Also reported are cases where an instrument stapled but failed to cut during gastro-intestinal anastomosis.16,17
We report here a case where the mechanical failure of the stapler occurred during excision of a pharyngeal pouch, leading to a change of method in use of the instrument.
The patient, a 66-year-old gentleman, first presented to our Otolaryngology department in April 1996 with a 6-month history of dysphagia for solids and heartburn associated with regurgitation of food. Flexible endoscopy had been arranged prior to referral, and this showed a large pharyngeal pouch at 20 cm. It had not been possible to pass the endoscope distal to this. The pouch was confirmed by a barium swallow, which also showed a tight cricopharyngeus. In August 1996 he underwent excision of the pouch with cricopharyngeal myotomy.
At operation an Ethicon Proximate TL3O linear stapler was placed across the neck of the diverticulum and fired in the usual manner. The pouch was transacted flush with the stapler according to the manufacturers instructions (Operation of the Proximate Reloadable Linear Stapler, Ethicon Ltd.) and the stapler removed. It then became apparent that the stapler had not functioned, leaving a large defect in the pharyngeal wall with no staples visible. The defect was closed in layers with absorbable sutures, and the patient made an uneventful recovery. He was swallowing normally when discharged 8 days post-operatively, and also when reviewed in clinic a month later. At this time a barium swallow was performed and this showed no evidence of metallic staples in the patient. A Shatzki ring was noted in the lower oesophagus. There were also no staples in the excised pouch on histological examination.
The stapler was returned to the manufacturer (Ethicon Quality Control, Cincinnati, USA) who reported the incident to the Food and Drug Administration. The stapler was tested and found to function normally. There was no comment in the report on the presence or absence of staples in the cartridge.
Staplers have been widely used in many surgical situations and found to be safe and reliable. Any mechanical device, however, will have a failure rate. Ethicon test fire every Proximate TL3O stapler after manufacture, and then insert a new cartridge of staples prior to packaging. It is possible that an instrument could be despatched empty if the cartridge were accidentally not replaced. It is not possible to check that the device has stapled correctly prior to its removal.
In the situation described here, we followed the manufacturers recommended practice of transacting the pouch flush with the stapler prior to its removal, a practice which has been followed by other authors.11 This runs the risk of leaving a large defect should the stapler fail to operate. Closure with sutures is difficult and time consuming, and the potential exists for contamination of the wound with pharyngeal contents, leading to an increased risk of infection and fistula formation.
We have changed our practice and now apply a straight artery forceps across the neck for the pouch, distal to the stapler, and then remove the stapler to inspect the staple line. The neck of the pouch may then be easily divided, using the artery forceps as a guide. We advocate that others adopt this safer method in pouch excision surgery.
Paper accepted 7May 1997
Correspondence: Dr S.S. Musheer Hussain, Associate Professor & Chief ENT. Head & Neck Surgery, The Aga Khan University Hospital, Stadium Road, P.O. Box 3500 Karachi 74800, Pakistan.
© 1998 The Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, J. R. Coll. Surg. Edinb., 43, February, 31-32.