1. Impact of the Novel Powered Circular Stapler on Risk of Anastomotic Leakage in Colorectal Anastomosis. A Propensity Score‐ Matched Study. [ECHELON CIRCULAR 1.7% (1/60) vs. manual circular 11.8% (14/119), p=0.022]
2. A retrospective matched analysis of 165 Echelon Circular cases from clinical study, and 1,348 manual circular stapler cases from Premier Healthcare Database [ECHELON CIRCULAR 1.8% (3/165) vs. manual circular 6.9% (93/1348) for anastomotic leaks, p<0.001; ECHELON CIRCULAR 6.1% (10/165) vs. manual circular 10.8% (146/1348) for re-admissions, p=0.019]
3. A Prospective, Multi‐ Center Evaluation of the ECHELON CIRCULAR Powered Stapler in Left‐Sided Colorectal Anastomoses, N=168
4. Large-scale is defined as sample size greater than 1500 cases.
5. A retrospective matched analysis of 165 Echelon Circular cases from clinical study, and 1,348 manual circular stapler cases from Premier Healthcare Database [ECHELON CIRCULAR 1.8% (3/165) vs. manual circular 6.9% (93/1348), p<0.001]
6. A retrospective matched analysis of 165 Echelon Circular cases from clinical study, and 1,348 manual circular stapler cases from Premier Healthcare Database [ECHELON CIRCULAR 6.1% (10/165) vs. manual circular 10.8% (146/1348), p=0.019]
7. A retrospective matched analysis of 165 Echelon Circular cases from clinical study, and 1,348 manual circular stapler cases from Premier Healthcare Database [ECHELON CIRCULAR 1.8% (3/165) vs. manual circular 9.2% (124/1348), p<0.001]
8. A retrospective matched analysis of 165 Echelon Circular cases from clinical study, and 1,348 manual circular stapler cases from Premier Healthcare Database [ECHELON CIRCULAR 4.8% (8/165) vs. manual circular 14.7% (198/1348), p<0.001]
9. Benchtop testing in porcine tissue at <34mmHg, comparing number of leaks of 11 for ECHELON CIRCULAR Powered Stapler (CDH29P) (n=30) to 21 for Medtronic EEA™ Circular Stapler with Tri-Staple™ Technology (TRIEEA28MT) (n=30), p<0.05, and preclinical perfusion model comparing means of 0.35085 (n=23) for CDH29P to 0.32665 (n=23) for TRIEEA28MT, p < 0.05
10. Benchtop testing on porcine colon measuring compressive forces during closure, comparing means of 8.22 lbf for Ethicon CDH29P (n=15) to 13.25 lbf for Medtronic TRIEEA28MT (n=15), p<0.01.
11. Staple line analysis in benchtop testing, comparing system standard deviation of pressure of 1.49 for CDH31P to 2.05 for Medtronic TRIEEA31MT.
12. Users firing in a porcine model, comparing Ethicon CDH29P to Medtronic EEA2835, p=0.003.

For complete indications, contraindications, warnings, precautions, and adverse reactions, please reference full package insert.