Literature DB >> 31957798

Risk factors and outcomes associated with anastomotic leaks following esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sivesh K Kamarajah1,2, Aaron Lin3, Thahesh Tharmaraja3, Yashvi Bharwada3, James R Bundred3, Dmitri Nepogodiev4, Richard P T Evans5,6, Pritam Singh7, Ewen A Griffiths5,6.   

Abstract

Anastomotic leaks (AL) are a major complication after esophagectomy. This meta-analysis aimed to determine identify risks factors for AL (preoperative, intra-operative, and post-operative factors) and assess the consequences to outcome on patients who developed an AL. This systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines, and eligible studies were identified through a search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases up to 31 December 2018. A meta-analysis was conducted with the use of random-effects modeling and prospectively registered with the PROSPERO database (Registration CRD42018130732). This review identified 174 studies reporting outcomes of 74,226 patients undergoing esophagectomy. The overall pooled AL rates were 11%, ranging from 0 to 49% in individual studies. Majority of studies were from Asia (n = 79). In pooled analyses, 23 factors were associated with AL (17 preoperative and six intraoperative). AL were associated with adverse outcomes including pulmonary (OR: 4.54, CI95%: 2.99-6.89, P < 0.001) and cardiac complications (OR: 2.44, CI95%: 1.77-3.37, P < 0.001), prolonged hospital stay (mean difference: 15 days, CI95%: 10-21 days, P < 0.001), and in-hospital mortality (OR: 5.91, CI95%: 1.41-24.79, P = 0.015). AL are a major complication following esophagectomy accounting for major morbidity and mortality. This meta-analysis identified modifiable risk factors for AL, which can be a target for interventions to reduce AL rates. Furthermore, identification of both modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors will facilitate risk stratification and prediction of AL enabling better perioperative planning, patient counseling, and informed consent.
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  complication; esophageal cancer; esophagectomy; risk factor

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31957798     DOI: 10.1093/dote/doz089

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Esophagus        ISSN: 1120-8694            Impact factor:   3.429


  8 in total

1.  Risk prediction nomogram for major morbidity related to primary resection for esophageal squamous cancer.

Authors:  Xiao-Long Liu; Rong-Chun Wang; Yi-Yang Liu; Hao Chen; Chen Qi; Li-Wen Hu; Jun Yi; Wei Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-08-06       Impact factor: 1.817

2.  Comparison of short-term outcomes from the International Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA), the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG), and the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA).

Authors: 
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2021-05-07

3.  Comparison of short-term outcomes from the International Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA), the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG), and the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA).

Authors: 
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2021-05-07

4.  Stem cell therapy applied for digestive anastomosis: Current state and future perspectives.

Authors:  Jacobo Trébol; Tihomir Georgiev-Hristov; Isabel Pascual-Miguelañez; Hector Guadalajara; Mariano García-Arranz; Damian García-Olmo
Journal:  World J Stem Cells       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 5.326

5.  Serum albumin at resection predicts in-hospital death, while serum lactate and aPTT on the first postoperative day anticipate anastomotic leakage after Ivor-Lewis-esophagectomy.

Authors:  Florian Scheufele; Thomas Vogel; Melanie Gasiorek; Alexander Novotny; Helmut Friess; Ihsan Ekin Demir; Stephan Schorn
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 2.895

6.  Management of intra-thoracic anastomotic leakages after esophagectomy: updated systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic vacuum therapy versus stenting.

Authors:  Pasquale Scognamiglio; Matthias Reeh; Nathaniel Melling; Marcus Kantowski; Ann-Kathrin Eichelmann; Seung-Hun Chon; Nader El-Sourani; Gerhard Schön; Alexandra Höller; Jakob R Izbicki; Michael Tachezy
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2022-08-11       Impact factor: 2.030

7.  Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer Performed During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Daniel P Dolan; Scott J Swanson; Daniel N Lee; Emily Polhemus; Suden Kucukak; Daniel C Wiener; Raphael Bueno; Jon O Wee; Abby White
Journal:  Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2021-07-01

8.  Economic Burden of Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy Compared to Alternative Therapy Methods in Patients with Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy.

Authors:  Ann-Kathrin Eichelmann; Sarah Ismail; Jennifer Merten; Patrycja Slepecka; Daniel Palmes; Mike G Laukötter; Andreas Pascher; Wolf Arif Mardin
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 3.452

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.