| Literature DB >> 28573178 |
Adrian Culetto1,2, Jean-Michel Gonzalez1,2, Geoffroy Vanbiervliet2,3, Pablo Miranda Garcia1,2, Juan Ignacio Tellechea1,2, Emmanuelle Garnier2, Stephane Berdah2,4, Marc Barthet1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Esophagogastric anastomosis (EGA) has a high risk of leakage. Based upon our experience in endoscopic gastrojejunal anastomosis using LAS, the aim of this study was to verify the technical feasibility and the safety of performing an EGA using a hybrid approach (endoscopic and surgical).Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28573178 PMCID: PMC5451277 DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-106577
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Endosc Int Open ISSN: 2196-9736
Fig. 1Resection of the lower esophagus 2 to 3 cm above the cardia using a linear stapler.
Fig. 2Puncture with a 19 G needle(Cook medical in Limerick, Ireland) above the aureastomosis esophagus.
Fig. 3Access to the gastric lumen at the upper edge of the gastric suture using a cystostome 10 Fr (Cook Medical, Limerick, Ireland) by a section of current Pulse Cut Fast 80 W.
Fig. 4With delivery of the catheter from the stent to the gastric position, expansion of the distal frange of the stent in the gastric cavity could be visualized.
Fig. 5Pulling from the stomach into the mediastinum was achieved by using the endoscope to guide the catheter of the stent and also the Twin Grasper, plus assistance in the abdomen from a surgical aid.
Fig. 6The proximal flange was deployed with correct positioning of the gastric cavity in the mediastinum and in contact with the esophagus had been confirmed.
Fig. 7Correct positioning of the stent was confirmed by the appearance of gastric juice in the stent.
Summary of technical and clinical outcomes from esophagogastric anastomosis with luminal apposition stent (LAS) by hydrid approach in 8 pigs.
|
| ||||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
| Anesthesia | ||||||||
Oxygen rate < 90 % | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | No |
Tachycardia > 120 /min | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No |
Total time, minutes | 150 | 110 | 85 | 114 | 114 | 64 | 76 | 68 |
| Surgical procedure | ||||||||
Total time, minutes | 75 | 55 | 45 | 38 | 39 | 28 | 25 | 28 |
Size esophagus resection, cm | 2 | 1.5 | 2 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Size stomach resection, cm | 10 | 8 | 13 | 9 | 7 | 11 | 15 | 11 |
| Endoscopic procedure | ||||||||
Total time, minutes | 70 | 45 | 35 | 61 | 60 | 24 | 41 | 35 |
Height line esophagus staples, cm | 54 | 52 | 50 | 48 | 60 | 50 | 52 | 52 |
| Follow-up | ||||||||
Transit | Yes | Yes | Yes | N | Yes | Yes | ||
Weight before procedure, kg | 30.3 | 31.4 | 34 | 28.8 | 31.6 | 32.7 | ||
Weight after procedure, kg | 23.9 | 25.2 | N | N | 26.9 | N | ||
Occlusion | No | No | No | N | No | No | ||
Sepsis, postoperative day | No | No | No | N | No | Yes (10) | ||
Death, postoperative day | No | No | Yes (2) | Yes (0) | No | Yes (10) | ||
| Autopsy | ||||||||
Peritonitis signs | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | ||
Anastomotic leakage | No | No | No | No | No | No | ||
Local inflammation | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | ||
Right position stent | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No data | ||
Endoscopic stent removability | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No data | ||
Fig. 8The fistula was covered by the proximal flange on the line of esophageal surgical sutures.