Literature DB >> 26202151

Prospective Comprehensive Swallowing Evaluation of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomies with Cervical Anastomosis: Silent Versus Vocal Aspiration.

Kfir Ben-David1, Amy Fullerton2, Georgios Rossidis3, Michael Michel3, Ryan Thomas3, George Sarosi3, Jeff White4, Christopher Giordano4, Steven Hochwald5.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Pneumonia and tracheal aspiration remain problematic following esophagectomy. We hypothesized that the incidence of postesophagectomy pneumonia occurs in part because of swallowing dysfunction and more importantly silent tracheobronchial aspiration. Therefore, we instituted a routine prospective formal swallowing evaluation to determine if the aspiration rate and its associated morbidity can be decreased by early identification of patients with silent or vocal aspiration.
METHODS: Patients undergoing minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy and receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACR) were prospectively enrolled between December 2013 to January 2015. A standardized cineradiography observation utilizing the Rosenbek penetration-aspiration (RPA) scale was used to rule out anastomotic leak and/or aspiration.
RESULTS: Of 27 patients evaluated, twelve patients were noted to have silent (n = 8) or vocal (cough n = 4) aspiration of thin liquid (n = 8) or nectar-thick consistency (n = 4) on their initial study. Three patients were noted to have an anastomotic leak and vocal aspiration on their initial study. Eight of the nine patients who aspirated but did not have an anastomotic leak on their initial study had a repeat RPA study prior to discharge showing improvement from the initial study. Six patients (22 %) had vocal cord paresis and clinical hoarseness, but only two patients who had clinical diagnosis of pneumonia were noted to have vocal cord paresis and silent aspiration.
CONCLUSIONS: Swallowing dysfunction remains a common problem after minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) with cervical anastomosis and can be readily identified. Silent aspiration likely contributes to pneumonia after MIE.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aspiration; Cervical anastomosis; Minimally invasive esophagectomies; Swallowing evaluation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26202151     DOI: 10.1007/s11605-015-2889-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg        ISSN: 1091-255X            Impact factor:   3.452


  16 in total

1.  Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients.

Authors:  James D Luketich; Arjun Pennathur; Omar Awais; Ryan M Levy; Samuel Keeley; Manisha Shende; Neil A Christie; Benny Weksler; Rodney J Landreneau; Ghulam Abbas; Matthew J Schuchert; Katie S Nason
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  Esophagectomy in the state of Florida: is regionalization of care warranted?

Authors:  Kfir Ben-David; Darwin Ang; Stephen R Grobmyer; Huazhi Liu; Tad Kim; Steven N Hochwald
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 0.688

3.  Transient diminished airway protection after transhiatal esophagectomy.

Authors:  R F Heitmiller; B Jones
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 2.565

4.  A penetration-aspiration scale.

Authors:  J C Rosenbek; J A Robbins; E B Roecker; J L Coyle; J L Wood
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 3.438

5.  Recurrent laryngeal nerve monitoring during esophagectomy and mediastinal lymph node dissection.

Authors:  Hans Gelpke; Felix Grieder; Marco Decurtins; Dieter Cadosch
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Surya S A Y Biere; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Kirsten W Maas; Luigi Bonavina; Camiel Rosman; Josep Roig Garcia; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Jean H G Klinkenbijl; Markus W Hollmann; Elly S M de Lange; H Jaap Bonjer; Donald L van der Peet; Miguel A Cuesta
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Decreasing morbidity and mortality in 100 consecutive minimally invasive esophagectomies.

Authors:  Kfir Ben-David; George A Sarosi; Juan C Cendan; Drew Howard; Georgios Rossidis; Steven N Hochwald
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  A comprehensive evaluation for aspiration after esophagectomy reduces the incidence of postoperative pneumonia.

Authors:  Mark F Berry; B Zane Atkins; Betty C Tong; David H Harpole; Thomas A D'Amico; Mark W Onaitis
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 5.209

9.  Minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical esophagogastric anastomosis.

Authors:  Steven N Hochwald; Kfir Ben-David
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-05-02       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 10.  Reducing hospital morbidity and mortality following esophagectomy.

Authors:  B Zane Atkins; Ashish S Shah; Kelley A Hutcheson; Jennifer H Mangum; Theodore N Pappas; David H Harpole; Thomas A D'Amico
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 4.330

View more
  3 in total

1.  Routine Radiologic Assessment for Anastomotic Leak Is Not Necessary in Asymptomatic Patients After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Hansol Kang; Kfir Ben-David; George A Sarosi; Ryan M Thomas
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Concomitant Mediastinoscopy Increases the Risk of Postoperative Pneumonia After Pulmonary Lobectomy.

Authors:  Sai Yendamuri; Athar Battoo; Kris Attwood; Samjot Singh Dhillon; Grace K Dy; Mark Hennon; Anthony Picone; Chukwumere Nwogu; Todd Demmy; Elisabeth Dexter
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 5.344

3.  An Investigation of Factors Related to Food Intake Ability and Swallowing Difficulty After Surgery for Thoracic Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Taichi Mafune; Shinya Mikami; Takehito Otsubo; Osamu Saji; Tsunehisa Matsushita; Takeharu Enomoto; Futaba Maki; Shinobu Tochimoto
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 3.438

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.