Literature DB >> 31634181

Anastomotic Techniques and Associated Morbidity in Total Minimally Invasive Transthoracic Esophagectomy: Results From the EsoBenchmark Database.

Wolfgang Schröder1, Dimitri A Raptis2, Henner M Schmidt2, Suzanne S Gisbertz3, Johnny Moons4, Emanuele Asti5, Misha D P Luyer6, Arnulf H Hölscher1, Paul M Schneider2, Mark I van Berge Henegouwen3, Philippe Nafteux4, Magnus Nilsson7, Jari Räsanen8, Francesco Palazzo9, Stuart Mercer10, Luigi Bonavina5, Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen6, Bas P L Wijjnhoven11, Piet Pattyn12, Peter P Grimminger13, Christiane J Bruns1, Christian A Gutschow2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe anastomotic techniques used for total minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy (ttMIE) and to analyze the associated morbidity.
BACKGROUND: ttMIE faces increasing application in surgical treatment of esophageal cancer. For esophagogastric reconstruction, different anastomotic techniques are currently used, but their effect on postoperative anastomotic leakage and morbidity has not been investigated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were selected from a basic dataset, collected during a 5-year period from 13 international surgical high-volume centers. Endpoints were anastomotic leakage rate and postoperative morbidity in correlation to anastomotic techniques, measured by the Clavien-Dindo classification and the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI).
RESULTS: Five anastomotic techniques were identified in 966 patients after ttMIE: intrathoracic end-to-side circular-stapled technique in 427 patients (double-stapling n = 90, purse-string n = 337), intrathoracic (n = 109) or cervical (n = 255) side-to-side linear-stapled, and cervical end-to-side hand-sewn (n = 175). Leakage rates were similar in intrathoracic and cervical anastomoses (15.9% vs 17.2%, P = 0.601), but overall complications (56.7%% vs 63.7%, P = 0.029) and median 90-day CCI {21 [interquartile range (IQR) 0-36] vs 29 [IQR 0-40], P = 0.019} favored intrathoracic reconstructions. Leakage rates after intrathoracic end-to-side double-stapling (23.3%) and cervical end-to-side hand-sewn (25.1%) techniques were significantly higher compared with intrathoracic side-to-side linear (15.6%), end-to-side purse-string (13.9%), and cervical side-to-side linear-stapled esophagogastrostomies (11.8%) (P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis confirmed anastomotic technique as independent predictor of leakage after ttMIE.
CONCLUSION: Results of this analysis present the current status of the technical evolution of ttMIE with anastomotic leakage as predominant surgical complication. However, technique-related morbidity requires cautious interpretation considering the long learning curve of this complex surgical procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31634181     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003538

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  21 in total

1.  Peripheral blood inflammation indices are effective predictors of anastomotic leakage in elective esophageal surgery.

Authors:  Cai-Xia Wu; Ding-Yu Rao; Cheng-Peng Sang; Shen-Yu Zhu; Liang Gu; Yan-Yang Wu; Jian-Feng Wang; Hua-Qiu Shi; Xiang-Cai Wang; Zhi-Xian Tang
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2021-12

Review 2.  Esophagectomy-prevention of complications-tips and tricks for the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative stage.

Authors:  Uberto Fumagalli Romario; Stefano de Pascale
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2022-07-18

3.  Reoperative Surgery After Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy.

Authors:  Keouna Pather; Alexander D Ghannam; Shoshana Hacker; Christina Guerrier; Erin M Mobley; Rhemar Esma; Ziad T Awad
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2021-09-09       Impact factor: 1.455

4.  Linear- versus circular-stapled esophagogastric anastomosis during esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Alberto Aiolfi; Andrea Sozzi; Gianluca Bonitta; Francesca Lombardo; Marta Cavalli; Silvia Cirri; Giampiero Campanelli; Piergiorgio Danelli; Davide Bona
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2022-10-15       Impact factor: 2.895

5.  Long-Term, Health-Related Quality of Life after Open and Robot-Assisted Ivor-Lewis Procedures-A Propensity Score-Matched Study.

Authors:  Anne-Sophie Mehdorn; Thorben Möller; Frederike Franke; Florian Richter; Jan-Niclas Kersebaum; Thomas Becker; Jan-Hendrik Egberts
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 6.  [Evidence in minimally invasive oncological surgery of the esophagus].

Authors:  B Babic; L M Schiffmann; W Schröder; C J Bruns; H F Fuchs
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 0.955

7.  Pre-Emptive Endoluminal Negative Pressure Therapy at the Anastomotic Site in Minimally Invasive Transthoracic Esophagectomy (the preSPONGE Trial): Study Protocol for a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Philip C Müller; Diana Vetter; Joshua R Kapp; Christoph Gubler; Bernhard Morell; Dimitri A Raptis; Christian A Gutschow
Journal:  Int J Surg Protoc       Date:  2021-03-18

8.  Hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy: a goal or a step?

Authors:  Guillaume Piessen; Clarisse Eveno; Thibault Voron
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 3.005

9.  [Perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery program for Ivor Lewis esophagectomy : First experiences of a high-volume center].

Authors:  C Mallmann; H Drinhaus; H Fuchs; L M Schiffmann; C Cleff; E Schönau; C J Bruns; T Annecke; W Schröder
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 10.  Management of anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy and gastric pull-up.

Authors:  Amber Famiglietti; John F Lazar; Hayley Henderson; Margaret Hamm; Stefanie Malouf; Marc Margolis; Thomas J Watson; Puja Gaur Khaitan
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 3.005

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.