Literature DB >> 12172856

Techniques and results of esophageal cancer surgery in Germany.

T P Hüttl1, M W Wichmann, T K Geiger, F W Schildberg, H Fürst.   

Abstract

AIMS: This study evaluated the techniques and short-term results of surgical treatment for esophageal cancer in Germany by a nationwide representative survey.
METHODS: In 2000 a questionnaire including 63 structured items concerning indication, technique, number of procedures, complications, and hospital mortality was sent to 308 randomly selected general, gastrointestinal, and thoracic surgeons and all university hospitals in Germany (20% of all surgeons). The response rate was 76% ( n=234).
RESULTS: In 1999 the 56 participating hospitals performed approximately 370,000 procedures, including 1,677 operations for esophageal diseases, including 891 esophagectomies, 706 for esophageal cancer, 285 for cancer of the cardia. Gastric interposition was the most common technique to restore alimentary tract continuity (86%). Interposition of the colon (ascending colon 64%) is a common procedure only in 22 centers, indicating that experience with this means of esophageal reconstruction is limited. There were no significant differences in complication and mortality rates between gastric transposition and colon interposition. The overall complication rate was 61%, with 36% after gastric interposition and 42% after colon interposition. Anastomotic leakages occurred in 12% and 15%, respectively, and the rate of graft necrosis was 3% in both groups. Hospital mortality was 8% with gastric transposition and 11% with colon interposition. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 24 days.
CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that gastric transposition is frequently used for reconstruction after esophageal resection for malignant disease. It appears that the colon is not as accepted as the stomach for reconstruction, although the reported complication rates compare well with those reported after gastric transposition. This study allows a realistic evaluation of the overall risk of these surgical techniques.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12172856     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-002-0294-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg        ISSN: 1435-2443            Impact factor:   3.445


  5 in total

1.  Endoscopic vacuum sponge therapy for esophageal defects.

Authors:  Gunnar Loske; Tobias Schorsch; Christian Müller
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-03-24       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Colonic interposition and supercharge for esophageal reconstruction.

Authors:  Yasuhiro Shirakawa; Yoshio Naomoto; Kazuhiro Noma; Kazufumi Sakurama; Toshio Nishikawa; Tetsuji Nobuhisa; Masahiko Kobayashi; Takaomi Okawa; Shinya Asami; Tomoki Yamatsuji; Minoru Haisa; Junji Matsuoka; Motohiko Hanazaki; Kiyoshi Morita; Takao Hiraki; Noriaki Tanaka
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2006-01-13       Impact factor: 3.445

3.  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

4.  Operative outcomes and long-term survival of patients undergoing colon interposition after esophagectomy for cancer.

Authors:  Tomohiro Akutsu; Takeo Fujita; Daisuke Kajiyama; Asako Ozaki; Kazuma Sato; Hisashi Fujiwara; Takashi Kojima; Hiroyuki Daiko
Journal:  Thorac Cancer       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 3.500

5.  A Comparison of Different Types of Esophageal Reconstructions: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Pang-Chieh Hung; Hsuan-Yu Chen; Yu-Kang Tu; Yung-Shuo Kao
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-08-26       Impact factor: 4.964

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.