Zhongwu Hu1, Xiaowe Wang1, Xush An1, Wenjin Li2, Yun Feng2, Zhenbing You3. 1. Division of Thoracic Surgery, Huai'an First People's Hospital, Nanjin Medical University, No. 6 West Beijin Road, Huai'an, Jiangsu, China. 2. Section of General Thoracic Surgery, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Huai'an First People's Hospital, Nanjin Medical University, No. 6 West Beijin Road, Huai'an, Jiangsu, China. 3. Division of Thoracic Surgery, Huai'an First People's Hospital, Nanjin Medical University, No. 6 West Beijin Road, Huai'an, Jiangsu, China. yhayyxw@163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Routine contrast esophagram has been shown to be increasingly limited in diagnosing anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy. METHODS: Patients undergoing esophagectomy from 2013 to 2014 at Huai'an First Peoples' Hospital were identified. We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent routine contrast esophagram on postoperative day 7 (range 6-10) to preclude anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy. RESULTS: In 846 patients who underwent esophagectomy, a cervical anastomosis was performed in 286 patients and an intrathoracic anastomosis in 560 patients. There were 57 (6.73%) cases with anastomotic leaks, including cervical leaks in 36 and intrathoracic leaks in 21 patients. In the cervical anastomotic leak patients, 13 were diagnosed by early local clinical symptoms and 23 underwent routine contrast esophagram. There were 7 (30.4%) true-positive, 11 (47.8%) false-negative, and five (21.8%) equivocal cases. In the intrathoracic anastomotic leak patients, four (19%) were diagnosed by clinical symptoms, 16 (76.2%) were true positives, and one (4.8%) was a false negative. Aspiration occurred in five patients with cervical anastomoses and in eight patients with intrathoracic anastomoses; aspiration pneumonitis did not occur in these cases. CONCLUSIONS: Gastrografin and barium are safe contrast agents to use in post-esophagectomy contrast esophagram. Because of the low sensitivity in detecting cervical anastomotic leaks, routine contrast esophagram is not advised. For patients with intrathoracic anastomoses, it is still an effective method for detecting anastomotic leaks.
BACKGROUND: Routine contrast esophagram has been shown to be increasingly limited in diagnosing anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy. METHODS:Patients undergoing esophagectomy from 2013 to 2014 at Huai'an First Peoples' Hospital were identified. We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent routine contrast esophagram on postoperative day 7 (range 6-10) to preclude anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy. RESULTS: In 846 patients who underwent esophagectomy, a cervical anastomosis was performed in 286 patients and an intrathoracic anastomosis in 560 patients. There were 57 (6.73%) cases with anastomotic leaks, including cervical leaks in 36 and intrathoracic leaks in 21 patients. In the cervical anastomotic leakpatients, 13 were diagnosed by early local clinical symptoms and 23 underwent routine contrast esophagram. There were 7 (30.4%) true-positive, 11 (47.8%) false-negative, and five (21.8%) equivocal cases. In the intrathoracic anastomotic leakpatients, four (19%) were diagnosed by clinical symptoms, 16 (76.2%) were true positives, and one (4.8%) was a false negative. Aspiration occurred in five patients with cervical anastomoses and in eight patients with intrathoracic anastomoses; aspiration pneumonitis did not occur in these cases. CONCLUSIONS:Gastrografin and barium are safe contrast agents to use in post-esophagectomy contrast esophagram. Because of the low sensitivity in detecting cervical anastomotic leaks, routine contrast esophagram is not advised. For patients with intrathoracic anastomoses, it is still an effective method for detecting anastomotic leaks.
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: Kelly R Haisley; Missy L DeSouza; Elizabeth N Dewey; Sabrina E Drexel; Yalini Vigneswaran; John G Hunter; James P Dolan Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2019-09-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Minke L Feenstra; Lily Alkemade; Janneke E van den Bergh; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Freek Daams; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Wietse J Eshuis Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2022-10-10 Impact factor: 4.339