Hiroaki Usui1, Masahide Fukaya2, Keita Itatsu1, Kazushi Miyata1, Ryoji Miyahara3, Kohei Funasaka3, Masato Nagino1. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showa-Ku, Nagoya, 466-8550, Japan. 2. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showa-Ku, Nagoya, 466-8550, Japan. mafukaya@med.nagoya-u.ac.jp. 3. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showa-Ku, Nagoya, 466-8550, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the location of esophagogastrostomy on acid and duodenogastroesophageal reflux (DGER) in patients undergoing gastric tube reconstruction and intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy. METHODS: Thirty patients receiving transthoracic esophagectomy without cervical lymph node dissection and gastric tube reconstruction by intrathoracic anastomosis were enrolled. All patients underwent 24-h pH and bilirubin monitoring and gastrointestinal endoscopy one year after surgery. Patients were divided into three groups according to esophagogastrostomy location: group A (n = 9), above the top of the aortic arch; group B (n = 15), between the top and bottom of the aortic arch; and group C (n = 6), below the bottom of the aortic arch. The relations among the esophagogastrostomy location, 24-h pH and bilirubin monitoring results, endoscopic findings, and reflux symptoms were investigated. RESULTS: No acid reflux into the remnant esophagus was observed in group A, whereas it was observed in three of 15 patients (20%) in group B and in two of six patients (33%) in group C (P = 0.139). No DGER was found in group A, whereas DGER was observed in eight (53%) patients in group B and all patients in group C (P < 0.001). Reflux esophagitis was observed in one patient (11%) in group A, five patients (33%) in group B, and all patients in group C (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: In gastric tube reconstruction via intrathoracic anastomosis, esophagogastrostomy should be performed above the top of the aortic arch to prevent postoperative DGER and reduce the incidence of reflux esophagitis.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the location of esophagogastrostomy on acid and duodenogastroesophageal reflux (DGER) in patients undergoing gastric tube reconstruction and intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy. METHODS: Thirty patients receiving transthoracic esophagectomy without cervical lymph node dissection and gastric tube reconstruction by intrathoracic anastomosis were enrolled. All patients underwent 24-h pH and bilirubin monitoring and gastrointestinal endoscopy one year after surgery. Patients were divided into three groups according to esophagogastrostomy location: group A (n = 9), above the top of the aortic arch; group B (n = 15), between the top and bottom of the aortic arch; and group C (n = 6), below the bottom of the aortic arch. The relations among the esophagogastrostomy location, 24-h pH and bilirubin monitoring results, endoscopic findings, and reflux symptoms were investigated. RESULTS: No acid reflux into the remnant esophagus was observed in group A, whereas it was observed in three of 15 patients (20%) in group B and in two of six patients (33%) in group C (P = 0.139). No DGER was found in group A, whereas DGER was observed in eight (53%) patients in group B and all patients in group C (P < 0.001). Reflux esophagitis was observed in one patient (11%) in group A, five patients (33%) in group B, and all patients in group C (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: In gastric tube reconstruction via intrathoracic anastomosis, esophagogastrostomy should be performed above the top of the aortic arch to prevent postoperative DGER and reduce the incidence of reflux esophagitis.
Authors: Sudip K Ghosh; John E Pandolfino; Qing Zhang; Andrew Jarosz; Nimeesh Shah; Peter J Kahrilas Journal: Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol Date: 2006-01-12 Impact factor: 4.052
Authors: J R Jamieson; H J Stein; T R DeMeester; L Bonavina; W Schwizer; R A Hinder; M Albertucci Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 1992-09 Impact factor: 10.864