Routine contrast esophagram has minimal impact on the postoperative management of patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Annals of Surgical Oncology

Volumn 21, Issue 8, 2014, Pages 2573-2579

  Cools Lartigue, Jonathan ^a   Andalib, Amin ^a   Abo Alsaud, Ali ^a   Gowing, Stephen ^a   Nguyen, Maxime ^a   Mulder, David ^a   Ferri, Lorenzo ^a  

^a MONTREAL GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BARIUM; CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ADULT; AGED; ANASTOMOSIS LEAKAGE; ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; ENTERIC FEEDING; ESOPHAGUS CANCER; ESOPHAGUS RESECTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DIAGNOSTIC USE; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; ESOPHAGEAL NEOPLASMS; ESOPHAGUS; FOLLOW UP; MIDDLE AGED; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PROGNOSIS; RADIOGRAPHY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANASTOMOTIC LEAK; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ROUTINE; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; ESOPHAGEAL NEOPLASMS; ESOPHAGECTOMY; ESOPHAGUS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PROGNOSIS; ROC CURVE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84905121689     PISSN: 10689265     EISSN: 15344681     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-3654-1     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Page RD, Shackcloth MJ, Russell GN, Pennefather SH. Surgical treatment of anastomotic leaks after oesophagectomy. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2005;27(2):337-343. (Pubitemid 40193148)
2. Agha FP, Orringer MB, Amendola MA. Gastric interposition following transhiatal esophagectomy: radiographic evaluation. Gastrointest Radiol. 1985;10(1):17-24. (Pubitemid 15179500)
3. Griffin SM, Lamb PJ, Dresner SM, Richardson DL, Hayes N. Diagnosis and management of a mediastinal leak following radical oesophagectomy. Br J Surg. 2001;88(10):1346-1351. (Pubitemid 32955415)
4. Boone J, Rinkes IB, van Leeuwen M, van Hillegersberg R. Diagnostic value of routine aqueous contrast swallow examination after oesophagectomy for detecting leakage of the cervical oesophagogastric anastomosis. ANZ J Surg. 2008;78(9):784-790.
5. Honing J, Pultrum BB, van der Jagt EJ, Groen H, Plukker JT. Routine or on demand radiological contrast examination in the diagnosis of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy. J Surg Oncol. 2009;100(8):699-702.
6. Pierie JP, de Graaf PW, van Vroonhoven TJ, Obertop H. Healing of the cervical esophagogastrostomy. J Am Coll Surg. 1999;188(4):448-454. (Pubitemid 29162704)
7. Solomon DG, Sasaki CT, Salem RR. An evaluation of the routine use of contrast radiography as a screening test for cervical anastomotic integrity after esophagectomy. Am J Surg. 2012;203(4):467-471.
8. Swanson JO, Levine MS, Redfern RO, Rubesin SE. Usefulness of high-density barium for detection of leaks after esophagogastrectomy, total gastrectomy, and total laryngectomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181(2):415-420. (Pubitemid 36909483)
9. Tirnaksiz MB, Deschamps C, Allen MS, Johnson DC, Pairolero PC. Effectiveness of screening aqueous contrast swallow in detecting clinically significant anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy. Eur Surg Res. 2005;37(2):123-128. (Pubitemid 40864176)
10. Gollub MJ, Bains MS. Barium sulfate: a new (old) contrast agent for diagnosis of postoperative esophageal leaks. Radiology. 1997;202(2):360-362. (Pubitemid 27051726)
11. Munitiz V, Martinez-de-Haro LF, Ortiz A, Ruiz-de-Angulo D, Pastor P, Parrilla P. Effectiveness of a written clinical pathway for enhanced recovery after transthoracic (Ivor Lewis) oesophagectomy. Br J Surg. 2010;97(5):714-718.
12. Ramírez JM, Blasco JA, Roig JV, et al. Enhanced recovery in colorectal surgery: a multicentre study. BMC Surg. 2011;11:9.
13. Lv L, Shao YF, Zhou YB. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for patients undergoing colorectal surgery: an update of meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012;27(12):1549-1554.
14. Lovely JK, Maxson PM, Jacob AK, et al. Case-matched series of enhanced versus standard recovery pathway in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2012;99(1):120-126.
15. Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS, Bass CS, Alexander JR, Bartolucci AA. Fast tracking after Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy. Chest. 2004;126(4):1187-1194. (Pubitemid 39391249)
16. Jiang K, Cheng L, Wang JJ, Li JS, Nie J. Fast track clinical pathway implications in esophagogastrectomy. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15(4):496-501.
17. Li C, Ferri LE, Mulder DS, et al. An enhanced recovery pathway decreases duration of stay after esophagectomy. Surgery. 2012;152(4):606-614;discussion 614-606.
18. Gerritsen A, Besselink MG, Cieslak KP, et al. Efficacy and complications of nasojejunal, jejunostomy and parenteral feeding after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(6):1144-1151.
19. Llaguna OH, Kim HJ, Deal AM, Calvo BF, Stitzenberg KB, Meyers MO. Utilization and morbidity associated with placement of a feeding jejunostomy at the time of gastroesophageal resection. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;15(10):1663-1669.
20. Levy RM, Trivedi D, Luketich JD. Minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Clin North Am. 2012;92(5):1265-1285.
21. Kato H, Miyazaki T, Sakai M, et al. Videofluoroscopic evaluation in oropharyngeal swallowing after radical esophagectomy with lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. Anticancer Res. 2007;27(6C):4249-4254.
22. Lanuti M, de Delva PE, Wright CD, et al. Post-esophagectomy gastric outlet obstruction: role of pyloromyotomy and management with endoscopic pyloric dilatation. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007;31(2):149-153. (Pubitemid 46150070)
23. Boyle MJ, Franceschi D, Livingstone AS. Transhiatal versus transthoracic esophagectomy: complication and survival rates. Am Surg. 1999;65(12):1137- 1141;discussion 1141-1132.