Xiao-Yang Hua1,2, Si-Yuan Dong1, Shu-Guang Zhang1. 1. Department of Thoracic Surgery, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China. 2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, Qingdao, China.
Abstract
Background: The standard treatment for esophageal carcinoma is extensive resection of the tumor and esophagogastric anastomosis despite the high incidence of related anastomotic complications, such as stricture and leakage. Thus, the choice of the cervical esophagogastric anastomotic method-triangulating stapling (TS) versus circular stapling (CS)-is a critical decision for the surgeon. Aim: To compare the incidence of major adverse outcomes between TS and CS in patients with resectable thoracic esophageal cancer. Methods: For this meta-analysis, PubMed, Embase, Wiley Online Library, Google Scholar, Wanfang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched for subject-relevant studies by using a rigorous study protocol established according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook. Anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, and postoperative pulmonary complications were the primary endpoints used for comparison. Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to assess the strength of association. Results: Six studies were selected by our inclusion/exclusion criteria and represented a total of 739 patients in our meta-analysis of TS (n = 376) versus CS (n = 363). The TS group showed a lower incidence of anastomotic stricture (RR: 0.23 [95% CI: 0.08-0.63]; P = .004) and pulmonary complications (RR: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.37-0.87]; P = .01). However, the incidence of anastomotic leakage was similar for the two groups (RR: 0.66 [95% CI: 0.41-1.09]; P = .1). Subgroup analysis of four studies in which the surgical methods were minimally invasive demonstrated the TS group to have a lower incidence of lung complications (RR: 0.55 [95% CI: 0.35-0.87]; P = .01), anastomotic leakage (RR: 0.36 [95% CI: 0.18-0.74]; P = .005), and anastomotic stricture (RR: 0.23 [95% CI: 0.05-0.98]; P = .05). Conclusion: The TS method for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy had a lower incidence of anastomotic stricture and postoperative lung complications.
Background: The standard treatment for esophageal carcinoma is extensive resection of the tumor and esophagogastric anastomosis despite the high incidence of related anastomotic complications, such as stricture and leakage. Thus, the choice of the cervical esophagogastric anastomotic method-triangulating stapling (TS) versus circular stapling (CS)-is a critical decision for the surgeon. Aim: To compare the incidence of major adverse outcomes between TS and CS in patients with resectable thoracic esophageal cancer. Methods: For this meta-analysis, PubMed, Embase, Wiley Online Library, Google Scholar, Wanfang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched for subject-relevant studies by using a rigorous study protocol established according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook. Anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, and postoperative pulmonary complications were the primary endpoints used for comparison. Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to assess the strength of association. Results: Six studies were selected by our inclusion/exclusion criteria and represented a total of 739 patients in our meta-analysis of TS (n = 376) versus CS (n = 363). The TS group showed a lower incidence of anastomotic stricture (RR: 0.23 [95% CI: 0.08-0.63]; P = .004) and pulmonary complications (RR: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.37-0.87]; P = .01). However, the incidence of anastomotic leakage was similar for the two groups (RR: 0.66 [95% CI: 0.41-1.09]; P = .1). Subgroup analysis of four studies in which the surgical methods were minimally invasive demonstrated the TS group to have a lower incidence of lung complications (RR: 0.55 [95% CI: 0.35-0.87]; P = .01), anastomotic leakage (RR: 0.36 [95% CI: 0.18-0.74]; P = .005), and anastomotic stricture (RR: 0.23 [95% CI: 0.05-0.98]; P = .05). Conclusion: The TS method for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy had a lower incidence of anastomotic stricture and postoperative lung complications.