Literature DB >> 30505592

Anastomotic leak and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in esophageal cancer.

Ravi Shridhar1, Caitlin Takahashi2, Jamie Huston3, Matthew P Doepker4, Kenneth L Meredith3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leaks (AL) cause significant morbidity after esophagectomy. Most patients receive neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NCR) prior to esophagectomy which has been associated with increase perioperative complications and mortality. We report on a comparison of AL rates in upfront surgical (UFS) and NCR patients.
METHODS: An esophagectomy database was queried for UFS and NCR patients treated between 1996 and 2015. Predictors of AL rate were identified using univariate and multivariate (MVA) analysis and propensity score matching (PSM).
RESULTS: We identified 820 patients (UFS, 288; NCR, 532). Overall AL rate was 5.4%. Decreased AL rate was observed in NCR patients on MVA (8.0% vs. 4.1%; P=0.02) but no difference was seen after PSM (7.7% vs. 4.2%; P=0.14). MVA of factors associated with decreased AL in UFS patients included distal esophageal tumors and body mass index (BMI) >25. Age, gender, year of surgery, histology, anastomotic location, and diabetes were not prognostic. Before PSM, MVA of NCR patients of factors associated with decreased AL revealed that only thoracic anastomosis was prognostic. However, this was not observed after PSM. MVA of factors associated with decreased AL in all patients revealed thoracic anastomosis, NCR, and BMI 25-30. After PSM, only distal esophageal tumors and thoracic anastomosis were prognostic for decreased AL.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no difference in the AL rate between UFS and NCR patients. Decreased AL rate was observed in patients with distal esophageal tumors and thoracic anastomosis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Esophageal cancer; anastomotic leak (AL); neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCR)

Year:  2018        PMID: 30505592      PMCID: PMC6219963          DOI: 10.21037/jgo.2018.04.09

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol        ISSN: 2078-6891


  34 in total

1.  Randomized trial comparing side-to-side stapled and hand-sewn esophagogastric anastomosis in neck.

Authors:  Sundeep Singh Saluja; Sukanta Ray; Sujoy Pal; Sumit Sanyal; Nikhil Agrawal; Nihar Ranjan Dash; Peush Sahni; Tushar Kanti Chattopadhyay
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-04-24       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 2.  Methods of esophagogastric anastomoses following esophagectomy for cancer: A systematic review.

Authors:  Roger H Kim; Kazuaki Takabe
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-05-01       Impact factor: 3.454

3.  Comparison of hand-sewn and stapled esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal resection for cancer: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  S Law; M Fok; K M Chu; J Wong
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Body mass index and survival in esophageal adenocarcinoma treated with chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy.

Authors:  Ravi Shridhar; Thomas Hayman; Sarah E Hoffe; Jill Weber; Khaldoun Almhanna; Michael Chuong; Richard C Karl; Kenneth L Meredith
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Comparison of manual and mechanical cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal resection for squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Hsao-Hsun Hsu; Jin-Shing Chen; Pei-Ming Huang; Jang-Ming Lee; Yung-Chie Lee
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.191

6.  Prevalence and risk factors for ischemia, leak, and stricture of esophageal anastomosis: gastric pull-up versus colon interposition.

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

7.  Improving outcomes after gastroesophageal cancer resection: can Japanese results be reproduced in Western centers?

Authors:  George B Hanna; Piers R Boshier; Alison Knaggs; Robert Goldin; Mitsuru Sasako
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2012-08

8.  Propensity-matched analysis of three techniques for intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis.

Authors:  Shanda H Blackmon; Arlene M Correa; Bob Wynn; Wayne L Hofstetter; Linda W Martin; Reza J Mehran; David C Rice; Steven G Swisher; Garrett L Walsh; Jack A Roth; Ara A Vaporciyan
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  Hospital volume, proportion resected and mortality from oesophageal and gastric cancer: a population-based study in England, 2004-2008.

Authors:  Victoria H Coupland; Jesper Lagergren; Margreet Lüchtenborg; Ruth H Jack; William Allum; Lars Holmberg; George B Hanna; Neil Pearce; Henrik Møller
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2012-10-19       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 10.  Technical factors that affect anastomotic integrity following esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sheraz R Markar; Shobhit Arya; Alan Karthikesalingam; George B Hanna
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2013-08-14       Impact factor: 5.344

View more
  2 in total

1.  Laser Doppler Flowmetry and Visible Light Spectroscopy of the Gastric Tube During Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.

Authors:  Nathkai Safi; Hans-Olaf Johannessen; Asle Wilhelm Medhus; Tom Mala; Syed S H Kazmi
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2020-11-27

2.  Review of MR-Guided Radiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Sangjune Laurence Lee; Michael Bassetti; Gert J Meijer; Stella Mook
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 6.244

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.