Comparing surgical outcomes of powered versus manual surgical staplers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The growing use of staplers, manual and powered, especially in minimally invasive surgeries, necessitates evaluating their efficacy in gastrointestinal and thoracic surgeries. Parameters analysed include anastomotic and air leakage rates, bleeding, infection, cost, and operative duration.

We searched Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science using terms like “surgical staplers,” “manual staplers,” “automatic staplers,” and “powered staplers.” We assessed study quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal tools and conducted meta-analysis using Review Manager software.

A total of 43,104 patients with a mean age of 60.8 were involved in the studies. The meta-analysis revealed a significant reduction in anastomotic leaks in GI surgery patients (OR 0.31, p = 0.0001) and a significant decrease in postoperative air leakage in thoracic surgery patients (OR 0.65, p = 0.05) when powered staplers were employed. Additionally, we observed a significant decline in hemostasis-related complications for both thoracic and GI surgeries (OR 0.48, p = 0.002) with the use of powered staplers. Although individually costlier than manual staplers, powered staplers significantly decreased total hospitalisation costs (MD -1725.82, p < 0.00001) amoungst the thoracic surgeries, due to the cost saved on remedying the lower rate of complications compared to manual staplers. It also decreased the average operative times in thoracic and GI surgeries, although not significant (p = 0.06, p = 0.07 respectively).

Powered staplers surpass manual staplers by reducing operative duration, total hospital costs, and complications like anastomotic leaks and bleeding. Hence, they are poised to become the preferred alternative in future surgeries.