OBJECTIVES: Assess outcomes following intrathoracic leaks after esophagectomy from 1970 to 2004 to evaluate the impact of evolving surgical and perioperative techniques on leak-associated mortality (LAM). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: An intrathoracic leak following esophagectomy has historically been considered a catastrophic event, with mortality as high as 71%. Concerns about this complication often affect choice of surgical approach for esophagectomy. METHODS: A retrospective review of all esophagectomies for cancer from 1970 to 2004 (n = 1223) was performed. Outcomes following intrathoracic anastomoses (n = 621) were analyzed by era: historical 1970-1986 (n = 145) and modern 1987-2004 (n = 476). RESULTS: There was no difference in the frequency of leak between the time intervals (4.8% versus 6.3%, P = 0.5). Despite a significant increase in the use of preoperative chemoradiation (1% versus 42%, P < 0.001) in the historical versus modern era, the overall mortality decreased from 11% to 2.5% (P < 0.001). The LAM was markedly reduced from 43% to 3.3% (P = 0.016). Factors associated with LAM included failure to use enteral nutrition (HR 13.22, CI 1.8-96.8) and era in which the surgery was performed (HR 18.3, 1.9-180). Other differences included an increased proportion of successful reoperations for leak control (11/30 versus 0/7, P = 0.08) and use of reinforcing muscle flaps (7/11). In the modern era, perioperative mortality is not significantly different for patients with or without intrathoracic leaks (3.3% versus 2.5%, P = 0.55), nor is long-term survival (P = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: Modern surgical management of intrathoracic leaks results in no increased mortality and has no impact on long-term survival. Clinical decisions regarding the use of intrathoracic anastomoses should not be affected by concerns of increased mortality from leak.
OBJECTIVES: Assess outcomes following intrathoracic leaks after esophagectomy from 1970 to 2004 to evaluate the impact of evolving surgical and perioperative techniques on leak-associated mortality (LAM). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: An intrathoracic leak following esophagectomy has historically been considered a catastrophic event, with mortality as high as 71%. Concerns about this complication often affect choice of surgical approach for esophagectomy. METHODS: A retrospective review of all esophagectomies for cancer from 1970 to 2004 (n = 1223) was performed. Outcomes following intrathoracic anastomoses (n = 621) were analyzed by era: historical 1970-1986 (n = 145) and modern 1987-2004 (n = 476). RESULTS: There was no difference in the frequency of leak between the time intervals (4.8% versus 6.3%, P = 0.5). Despite a significant increase in the use of preoperative chemoradiation (1% versus 42%, P < 0.001) in the historical versus modern era, the overall mortality decreased from 11% to 2.5% (P < 0.001). The LAM was markedly reduced from 43% to 3.3% (P = 0.016). Factors associated with LAM included failure to use enteral nutrition (HR 13.22, CI 1.8-96.8) and era in which the surgery was performed (HR 18.3, 1.9-180). Other differences included an increased proportion of successful reoperations for leak control (11/30 versus 0/7, P = 0.08) and use of reinforcing muscle flaps (7/11). In the modern era, perioperative mortality is not significantly different for patients with or without intrathoracic leaks (3.3% versus 2.5%, P = 0.55), nor is long-term survival (P = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: Modern surgical management of intrathoracic leaks results in no increased mortality and has no impact on long-term survival. Clinical decisions regarding the use of intrathoracic anastomoses should not be affected by concerns of increased mortality from leak.
Authors: S G Swisher; L Deford; K W Merriman; G L Walsh; R Smythe; A Vaporicyan; J A Ajani; T Brown; R Komaki; J A Roth; J B Putnam Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2000-06 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: John R Doty; Jorge D Salazar; Arlene A Forastiere; Elisabeth I Heath; Lawrence Kleinberg; Richard F Heitmiller Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Steen Christian Kofoed; Dan Calatayud; Lone Susanne Jensen; Marianne Vinbaek Jensen; Lars Bo Svendsen Journal: World J Surg Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Gijs H K Berkelmans; Ewout A Kouwenhoven; Boudewijn J J Smeets; Teus J Weijs; Luis C Silva Corten; Marc J van Det; Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen; Misha D P Luyer Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2015-08-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Charles E Woodall; Ryan Duvall; Charles R Scoggins; Kelly M McMasters; Robert C G Martin Journal: J Oncol Date: 2009-02-05 Impact factor: 4.375