Literature DB >> 11553222

Does the interponat affect outcome after esophagectomy for cancer?

J D Urschel1.   

Abstract

Clinical decision-making in esophageal cancer surgery is a process of balancing the risks of treatment against potential benefits, such as survival and quality of life. Various options are available for esophageal reconstruction. While these reconstructive options do not directly have an impact on cancer survival, they do affect operative morbidity and long-term quality of life. The affect of various interponats (reconstructive conduits) and routes of reconstruction on operative morbidity and foregut function is reviewed. Gastric interponats are preferred for esophageal reconstruction because of their reliable vascularity and the relative simplicity of the reconstructive operation. Colon interponats supposedly provide better long-term function as an esophageal substitute (unproven), but at the cost of increased operative complexity and morbidity. Colon interposition is therefore reserved for situations in which gastric transposition is not feasible. Both posterior and anterior mediastinal routes of gastric interponat reconstruction are acceptable (meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials). Posterior mediastinal reconstruction is usually preferred when a complete (R0) resection has been accomplished. Anterior mediastinal reconstruction may prevent secondary dysphagia after incomplete (R1, R2) resections.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11553222     DOI: 10.1046/j.1442-2050.2001.00169.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Esophagus        ISSN: 1120-8694            Impact factor:   3.429


  9 in total

1.  Comparison of the short-term health-related quality of life in patients with esophageal cancer with different routes of gastric tube reconstruction after minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Authors:  Hao Wang; Lijie Tan; Mingxiang Feng; Yi Zhang; Qun Wang
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-09-21       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Esophagectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations.

Authors:  Donald E Low; William Allum; Giovanni De Manzoni; Lorenzo Ferri; Arul Immanuel; MadhanKumar Kuppusamy; Simon Law; Mats Lindblad; Nick Maynard; Joseph Neal; C S Pramesh; Mike Scott; B Mark Smithers; Valérie Addor; Olle Ljungqvist
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Heart laceration during oesophagectomy for the treatment of oesophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Justyna Izabela Zygoń; Jarosław Skokowski; Jacek Zieliński; Kamil Drucis; Katarzyna Golabek-Dropiewska
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2010-04-12

4.  Ileocolon Interposition Graft Following Surgery for Gastro-esophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Naveena A N Kumar; Rajeshwaran Ramalingam; Harish H Kumar; Aravind Ramkumar; Ranjit Vijayahari
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2013-03-12

Review 5.  Gastric tube perforation after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Hideyuki Ubukata; Takeshi Nakachi; Takanobu Tabuchi; Hiroyuki Nagata; Akira Takemura; Jiro Shimazaki; Satoru Konishi; Takafumi Tabuchi
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2011-05-01       Impact factor: 2.549

6.  Intestinal interposition for benign esophageal disease.

Authors:  Racquel Smith Bueno; Carlos Galvani; Santiago Horgan
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-02

7.  Colon interposition for esophageal replacement: a single-center experience.

Authors:  Pietro Renzulli; Alexander Joeris; Oliver Strobel; Annemarie Hilt; Christoph A Maurer; Waldemar Uhl; Markus W Büchler
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2004-01-09       Impact factor: 3.445

8.  Laparoscopic retrosternal gastric pull-up for fistulized mediastinal mass.

Authors:  Benedetto Mungo; Arianna Barbetta; Anne O Lidor; Miloslawa Stem; Daniela Molena
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2017-03-27

9.  Comparison of the outcomes between thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy via retrosternal and prevertebral lifting paths by the same surgeon.

Authors:  Bing Lv; Yong-Zhong Tao; Yu Zhu; Jing Wu; Bin Zhong; Fu-Chao Luo; Yang Liu; Ze-Xue Zhang
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-08-30       Impact factor: 2.754

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.