Anja Schaible1, Alexis Ulrich2, Ulf Hinz2, Markus W Büchler2, Peter Sauer3. 1. Department of General Surgery, University of Heidelberg, INF 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. Anja.Schaible@med.uni-heidelberg.de. 2. Department of General Surgery, University of Heidelberg, INF 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: After esophageal surgery, many centers conduct a routine diagnostic test before reintroducing oral intake. However, the clinical value in asymptomatic patients has been questioned. Therefore, we left this decision to the discretion of the operating surgeon and documented the data prospectively. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2013, 185 consecutive patients underwent elective esophageal resection in our institution. The decision as to whether an endoscopy was to be performed as a routine-check or when a leak was clinically suspected was at the discretion of the operating surgeon. An immediate endoscopy was performed on emerging clinical signs of a leak. If a routine check was planned, it was performed between postoperative days 5-7. RESULTS: Of the 185 patients, 84 % had an endoscopy of the anastomosis during the hospital stay. Of the patients who underwent an endoscopy, 61 % were on a routine-check. In this group, one patient showed a leak at the time of endoscopy, 11 patients had pathological findings, 3 of these patients developed a leak later. Eighty-three patients had no pathological findings; nevertheless, 7 developed a leak later. In the on-demand-group, 10 patients showed a leak at the time of endoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: In a minority of patients, a routine-check of the anastomosis between days 5-7 revealed pathological findings that later led to an anastomotic leak (3/11). In contrast, a routine-check without pathological findings could not rule out the development of a future leak (7/83). Therefore, we conclude that routine postoperative studies to identify leaks after esophageal resection are not justified.
PURPOSE: After esophageal surgery, many centers conduct a routine diagnostic test before reintroducing oral intake. However, the clinical value in asymptomatic patients has been questioned. Therefore, we left this decision to the discretion of the operating surgeon and documented the data prospectively. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2013, 185 consecutive patients underwent elective esophageal resection in our institution. The decision as to whether an endoscopy was to be performed as a routine-check or when a leak was clinically suspected was at the discretion of the operating surgeon. An immediate endoscopy was performed on emerging clinical signs of a leak. If a routine check was planned, it was performed between postoperative days 5-7. RESULTS: Of the 185 patients, 84 % had an endoscopy of the anastomosis during the hospital stay. Of the patients who underwent an endoscopy, 61 % were on a routine-check. In this group, one patient showed a leak at the time of endoscopy, 11 patients had pathological findings, 3 of these patients developed a leak later. Eighty-three patients had no pathological findings; nevertheless, 7 developed a leak later. In the on-demand-group, 10 patients showed a leak at the time of endoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: In a minority of patients, a routine-check of the anastomosis between days 5-7 revealed pathological findings that later led to an anastomotic leak (3/11). In contrast, a routine-check without pathological findings could not rule out the development of a future leak (7/83). Therefore, we conclude that routine postoperative studies to identify leaks after esophageal resection are not justified.
Authors: M S Maish; S R DeMeester; E Choustoulakis; J W Briel; J A Hagen; J H Peters; J C Lipham; C G Bremner; T R DeMeester Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2005-07-28 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Arzu Oezcelik; Farzaneh Banki; Shahin Ayazi; Emmanuele Abate; Joerg Zehetner; Helen J Sohn; Jeffrey A Hagen; Steven R DeMeester; John C Lipham; Suzanne L Palmer; Tom R DeMeester Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-02-05 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: John W Briel; Anand P Tamhankar; Jeffrey A Hagen; Steven R DeMeester; Jan Johansson; Emmanouel Choustoulakis; Jeffrey H Peters; Cedric G Bremner; Tom R DeMeester Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Natalie S Blencowe; Sean Strong; Angus G K McNair; Sara T Brookes; Tom Crosby; S Michael Griffin; Jane M Blazeby Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Florian Scheufele; Thomas Vogel; Melanie Gasiorek; Alexander Novotny; Helmut Friess; Ihsan Ekin Demir; Stephan Schorn Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2022-04-28 Impact factor: 2.895