Technical factors that affect anastomotic integrity following esophagectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Annals of Surgical Oncology

Volumn 20, Issue 13, 2013, Pages 4274-4281

  Markar, Sheraz R ^a   Arya, Shobhit ^a   Karthikesalingam, Alan ^b   Hanna, George B ^a  

^a ST MARY S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b ST GEORGE S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANASTOMOSIS LEAKAGE; ARTIFICIAL EMBOLISM; CANCER SURGERY; EMBASE; ESOPHAGUS ANASTOMOSIS; ESOPHAGUS CANCER; ESOPHAGUS RESECTION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PREOPERATIVE CARE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ANASTOMOSIS, SURGICAL; ANASTOMOTIC LEAK; ESOPHAGEAL NEOPLASMS; ESOPHAGECTOMY; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84892366621     PISSN: 10689265     EISSN: 15344681     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-013-3189-x     Document Type: Review

References (70)

1. Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, et al. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379:1887-92.
2. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:69-90.
3. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62(1):10-29.
4. Coupland VH, Lagergren J, Luchtenborg M, et al. Hospital volume, proportion resected and mortality from oesophageal and gastric cancer: a population-based study in England, 2004-2009. Gut. 2013;62(7):961-6.
5. Hanna GB, Boshier PR, Knaggs A, et al. Improving outcomes after gastroesophageal cancer resection: can Japanese results be reproduced in Western centers? Arch Surg. 2012;147(8):738-45.
6. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177-88.
7. Law S, Fok M, Chu KM, et al. Comparison of hand-sewn and stapled esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal resection for cancer: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 1997;226(2):169-73.
8. Hsu HH, Chen JS, Huang PM, et al. Comparison of manual and mechanical cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal resection for squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2004;25(6):1097-101.
9. Laterza E, de'Manzoni G, Veraldi GF, et al. Manual compared with mechanical cervical oesophagogastric anastomosis: a randomised trial. Eur J Surg. 1999;165(11):1051-4.
10. Valverde A, Hay JM, Fingerhut A, et al. Manual versus mechanical esophagogastric anastomosis after resection for carcinoma: a controlled trial. French Associations for Surgical Research. Surgery. 1996;120(3):476-83.
11. Luechakiettisak P, Kasetsunthom S. Comparison of hand-sewn and stapled in esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal cancer resection: a prospective randomized study. J Med Assoc Thai. 2008;91(5):681-5.
12. Walther B, Johansson J, Johansson F, et al. Cervical or thoracic anastomosis after esophageal resection and gastric tube reconstruction: a prospective randomized trial comparing sutured neck anastomosis with stapled intrathoracic anastomosis. Ann Surg. 2003;238(6):803-12.
13. Okuyama M, Motoyama S, Suzuki H, et al. Hand-sewn cervical anastomosis versus stapled intra-thoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy for middle or lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a prospective randomized controlled study. Surg Today. 2007;37(11): 947-52.
14. Craig SR, Walker WS, Cameron EW, et al. A prospective randomized study comparing stapled with handsewn oesophagogastric anastomoses. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1996;41(1):17-9.
15. George WD, West of Scotland and Highland Anastomosis Study Group. Suturing or stapling in gastrointestinal surgery: a prospective randomized study. Br J Surg. 1991;78:337-41.
16. Saluja SS, Ray S, Pal S, et al. Randomized trial comparing sideto- side stapled and hand-sewn esophagogastric anastomosis in neck. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(7):1287-95.
17. Chasseray VM, Kiroff GK, Buard JL, et al. Cervical or thoracic anastomosis for esophagectomy for carcinoma. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1989;169(1):55-62.
18. Ribet M, Debrueres B, Lecomte-Houcke M. Resection for advanced cancer of the thoracic esophagus: cervical or thoracic anastomosis? Late results of a prospective randomized study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1992;103(4):784-9.
19. Lam TC, Fok M, Cheng SW, et al. Anastomotic complications after esophagectomy for cancer. A comparison of neck and chest anastomoses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1992;104:395-400.
20. Nurnberger HR, Lohlein D. Experiences with reliability and rate of complications in collar or thoracic anastomosis after subtotal esophagectomy. Zentralbl Chir. 1994;119:233-9.
21. Blewett CJ, Miller JD, Young JE, et al. Anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a comparison of thoracic and cervical anastomoses. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2001;7:75-8.
22. Egberts JH, Schniewind B, Bestmann B, et al. Impact of the site of anastomosis after oncologic esophagectomy on quality of life- a prospective, longitudinal outcome study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:566-75.
23. Klink CD, Binnebosel M, Otto J, et al. Intrathoracic versus cervical anastomosis after resection of esophageal cancer: a matched pair analysis of 72 patients in a single center study. World J Surg Oncol. 2012;10:1477-9.
24. Ben-David K, Sarosi GA, Cendan JC, et al. Decreasing morbidity and mortality in 100 consecutive minimally invasive esophagectomies. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:162-7.
25. Berger AC, Bloomenthal A, Weksler B, et al. Oncologic efficacy is not compromised, and may be improved with minimally invasive esophagectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212(4):560-6.
26. Gao Y, Wang Y, Chen L, et al. Comparison of open three-field and minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2011;12:366-9.
27. Hamouda AH, Forshaw MJ, Tsigritis K, et al. Perioperative outcomes after transition from conventional to minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in a specialized center. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:865-9.
28. Lee JM, Cheng JW, Lin MT, et al. Is there any benefit to incorporating a laparoscopic procedure into minimally invasive esophagectomy? The impact on perioperative results in patients with esophageal cancer. World J Surg. 2011;35:790-7.
29. Nafteux P, Moons J, Coosemans W, et al. Minimally invasive oesophagectomy: a valuable alternative to open oesophagectomy for the treatment of early oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction carcinoma. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011;40:1455-63.
30. Safranek PM, Cubitt J, Booth MI, et al. Review of open and minimal access approaches to oesophagectomy for cancer. Br J Surg. 2010;97:1845-53.
31. Schroder W, Holscher AH, Bludau M, et al. Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy with and without laparoscopic conditioning of the gastric conduit. World J Surg. 2010;34:738-43.
32. Smithers BM, Gotley DC, Martin I, et al. Comparison of the outcomes between open and minimally invasive esophagectomy. Ann Surg. 2007;245:232-40.
33. Yamasaki M, Miyata H, Fujiwara Y, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: comparative analysis of open and hand-assisted laparoscopic abdominal lymphadenectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction. J Surg Oncol. 2011;104:623-8.
34. Zingg U, McQuinn A, DiValentino D, et al. Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;87:911-9.
35. Biere SS, Maas KW, Cuesta MA, et al. Cervical or thoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Surg. 2011;28:29-35.
36. Bartels H, Thorban S, Siewert JR. Anterior versus posterior reconstruction after transhiatal oesophagectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Surg 1993;80:1141-4.
37. Gawad KA, Hosch SB, Bumann D, et al. How important is the route of reconstruction after esophagectomy: a prospective randomized study. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:1490-6.
38. van Lanschot JJ, van Blankenstein M, Oei HY, et al. Randomized comparison of prevertebral and retrosternal gastric tube reconstruction after resection of oesophageal carcinoma. Br J Surg. 1999;86:102-8.
39. Zieren HU, Muller JM, Pichlmaier H. Prospective randomized study of one- or two-layer anastomosis following oesophageal resection and cervical oesophagogastrostomy. Br J Surg. 1993; 80:608-11.
40. Motoyama S, Kitamura M, Saito R, et al. Surgical outcome of colon interposition by the posterior mediastinal route for thoracic esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;83:1273-8.
41. Khiria LS, Pal S, Peush S, et al. Impact on outcome of the route of conduit transposition after transhiatal oesophagectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Dig Liver Dis. 2009;41:711-6.
42. Chan ML, Hsieh CC, Wang CW, et al. Reconstruction after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: retrosternal or posterior mediastinal route? J Chin Med Assoc. 2011;74:505-10.
43. Akiyama S, Ito S, Sekiguchi H, et al. Preoperative embolization of gastric arteries for esophageal cancer. Surgery. 1996;120: 542-6.
44. Akiyama S, Kodera Y, Sekiguchi H, et al. Preoperative embolization therapy for esophageal operation. J Surg Oncol. 1998;69: 219-23.
45. Isomura T, Itoh S, Akiyama S, et al. Efficacy of gastric blood supply redistribution by transarterial embolization: preoperative procedure to prevent postoperative anastomotic leaks following esophagoplasty for esophageal carcinoma. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 1999;22:119-23.
46. Diana M, Hubner M, Vuilleumier H, et al. Redistribution of gastric blood flow by embolization of gastric arteries before esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;91:1546-51.
47. Farran L, Miro M, Alba E, et al. Preoperative gastric conditioning in cervical gastroplasty. Dis Esophagus. 2011;24:205-10.
48. Nguyen NT, Nguyen XT, Reavis KM, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy with and without gastric ischemic conditioning. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:1637-41.
49. Perry KA, Enestvedt CK, Pham TH, et al. Esophageal replacement following gastric devascularization is safe, feasible, and may decrease anastomotic complications. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;14:1069-73.
50. Berrisford RG, Veeramootoo D, Parameswaran R, et al. Laparoscopic ischaemic conditioning of the stomach may reduce gastric-conduit morbidity following total minimally invasive oesophagectomy. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2009;36:888-93.
51. Veeramootoo D, Shore AC, Shields B, et al. Ischemic conditioning shows a time-dependent influence on the fate of the gastric conduit after minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1126-31.
52. Wajed SA, Veeramootoo D, Shore AC. Surgical optimisation of the gastric conduit for minimally invasive oesophagectomy. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:271-6.
53. Zahedi M, Ganai S, Yetasook AK, et al. Laparoscopic ischemic conditioning as a modality to reduce gastric conduit morbidity following esophagectomy. Digestive Disease Week 2012; Poster presentation.
54. Law S, Wong KH, Kwok KF, et al. Predictive factors for postoperative pulmonary complications and mortality after esophagectomy for cancer. Ann Surg. 2004;240:791-800.
55. Marietter C, Taillier G, Van Seuningen I, et al. Factors affecting postoperative course and survival after en bloc resection for esophageal carcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;78:1177-83.
56. Noble F, Curtis N, Harris S, South Coast Cancer Collaboration- Oesophago-Gastric (SC-OG), et al. Risk assessment using a novel score to predict anastomotic leak and major complications after oesophageal resection. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16:1083-95.
57. Alanezi K, Urschel JD. Mortality secondary to esophageal anastomotic leak. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004;10:71-5.
58. Hulscher JB, Tijssen JG, Obertop H, et al. Transthoracic versus transhiatal resection for carcinoma of the esophagus: a metaanalysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;72:306-13.
59. Verhoef C, van der Weyer R, Schaapveld M, et al. Better survival in patients with esophageal cancer after surgical treatment in university hospitals: a plea for performance by surgical oncologists. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:1678-87.
60. Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Vyas S, et al. Hand-sewn versus stapled oesophago-gastric anastomosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;15(5):876-84.
61. Blencowe NS, Strong S, McNair AG, et al. Reporting of shortterm clinical outcomes after esophagectomy: a systematic review. Ann Surg. 2012;255:658-66.
62. Carrott PW, Markar SR, Kuppusamy MK, et al. Accordian severity grading system: assessment of relationship between costs, length of hospital stay, and survival in patients with complications after esophagectomy for cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;215(3):331-6.
63. Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Low DE. Outcomes assessment of the surgical management of esophageal cancer in younger and older patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012;94(5):1652-8.
64. Schroder W, Beckurts KT, Stahler D, et al. Microcirculatory changes associated with gastric tube formation in the pig. Eur Surg Res. 2002;34:411-7.
65. National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit-The Royal College of Surgeons of England 2010.
66. Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, et al. Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg. 2012;256(1):95-103.
67. Reavis KM, Chang EY, Hunter JG, Jobe BA. Utilization of the delay phenomenon improves blood flow and reduces collage deposition in esophagogastric anastomoses. Ann Surg. 2005; 241:736-47.
68. Urschel JD, Antkowiak JG, Delacure MD, Takita H. Ischemic conditioning (delay phenomenon) improves esophagogastric anastomotic wound healing in the rat. J Surg Oncol. 1997;66: 254-6.
69. Stiles BM, Mirza F, Coppolino A, et al. Clinical T2-T3N0MO esophageal cancer: the risk of node positive disease. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;92(2):491-6.
70. Hamai Y, Hihara J, Emi M, et al. Esophageal reconstruction using the terminal ileum and right colon in esophageal cancer surgery. Surg Today. 2012;42(4):342-50.