12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Call for Papers: Artificial Intelligence in Gastroenterology

      Submit here before May 31, 2024

      About Digestion: 3.2 Impact Factor I 6.4 CiteScore I 0.914 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Cervical or Thoracic Anastomosis after Esophagectomy for Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

      meta-analysis

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Cervical anastomosis and thoracic anastomosis are used for gastric tube reconstruction after esophagectomy for cancer. This systematic review was conducted in order to identify randomized trials that compare cervical with thoracic anastomosis. Methods: A literature search for randomized trials was performed in the following databases: Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Results: A total of 4 trials were included. All studies had a small sample size and were of moderate quality. One trial was excluded from the meta-analysis. The following outcomes were significantly associated with a cervical anastomosis: recurrent laryngeal nerve trauma (OR: 7.14; 95% CI: 1.75–29.14; p = 0.006) and anastomotic leakage (OR: 3.43; 95% CI: 1.09–10.78; p = 0.03). None of the following outcomes were associated with the location of the anastomosis: pulmonary complications (OR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.13–5.59; p = 0.87), perioperative mortality (OR: 1.24; 95% CI: 0.35–4.41; p = 0.74), benign stricture formation (OR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.17–3.87; p = 0.79) or tumor recurrence (OR: 2.01; 95% CI: 0.68–5.91; p = 0.21). Conclusion: Cervical anastomosis could be associated with a higher leak rate and recurrent nerve trauma. However, the currently available randomized evidence is limited. Further randomized trials are needed to provide sufficient evidence for the preferred location of the anastomosis after esophagectomy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The surgical treatment of carcinoma of the oesophagus; with special reference to a new operation for growths of the middle third.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Total three-stage oesophagectomy for cancer of the oesophagus.

            The technique of total three-stage oesophagectomy is described fully. Points of detail in the procedure of the abdominal, thoracic and cervical phases are emphasized. A brief note is made regarding the management of the respiratory situation at the end of the operation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Anastomotic leakage post-esophagogastrectomy for esophageal carcinoma: retrospective analysis of predictive factors, management and influence on longterm survival in a high volume centre.

              Anastomotic leak post-gastro-esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma remains an important issue in immediate as well as late morbidity and mortality. Several predictive factors such as patient and technical variables have been suggested with inconsistent findings. Our aim was to compare these factors and the results of treatment of anastomotic dehiscence on short and longterm survival in our center to published data. A retrospective study of 276 consecutive patients post-Ivor-Lewis gastro-esophagogastrectomy for esophageal carcinoma between 1992 and 1999. Explanatory variables taken into account for predicting anastomotic leak included preoperative weight loss, neoadjuvant therapy, inkwelling of the anastomosis, gastric drainage procedure and involvement of longitudinal resection margins. Incidence variation over time was compared. 5-year survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. The anastomotic leak rate was 5.1% with only minor variation over time. The 30-day mortality with anastomotic leak was 35.7% compared to 4.2% for patients without leak (P<0.05). None of the suggested explanatory variables analyzed reached statistical significance at a 5% level. On multiple logistic regression there was a trend towards gastric outlet drainage procedure which might decrease the relative risk by 61% (P=0.099). After excluding the 30-day mortality the 5-year survival with anastomotic leak was not different to those without. None of the factors reported in the literature reached statistical significance in our series. High institutional and high surgeon volume seem to outweigh any other contributing factor. Aggressive management for substantial leaks is advocated by the authors as long term palliation does not seem to be affected once the leak has been successfully treated.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                DSU
                Dig Surg
                10.1159/issn.0253-4886
                Digestive Surgery
                S. Karger AG
                0253-4886
                1421-9883
                2011
                March 2011
                04 February 2011
                : 28
                : 1
                : 29-35
                Affiliations
                Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                *S.S.A.Y. Biere, MD, Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, NL–1081 HV Amsterdam (The Netherlands), Tel. +31 20 44 44 444, Fax +31 20 44 44 512, E-Mail s.biere@vumc.nl
                Article
                322014 Dig Surg 2011;28:29–35
                10.1159/000322014
                21293129
                e9566354-c893-4191-9133-b3ca470e37db
                © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 4, Pages: 7
                Categories
                Review

                Oncology & Radiotherapy,Gastroenterology & Hepatology,Surgery,Nutrition & Dietetics,Internal medicine
                Thoracic anastomosis,Cervical anastomosis,Esophagectomy

                Comments

                Comment on this article