» Articles » PMID: 11371275

Anastomotic Leaks After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: a Comparison of Thoracic and Cervical Anastomoses

Overview
Date 2001 May 24
PMID 11371275
Citations 33
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background And Objectives: Esophagogastric anastomotic leaks remain a significant problem after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Many investigators have reported that leaks are more frequent after cervical, as opposed to thoracic, esophagogastric anastomoses. We conducted a retrospective review to assess the effect of anastomotic location (thoracic or cervical) on anastomotic leak incidence and severity.

Methods: Seventy-four consecutive patients with esophageal cancer underwent esophagectomy and esophagogastric anastomoses at our institution over a four-year period. Their charts were reviewed retrospectively and data was collected on age, gender, histology, stage, resection margin status, adjuvant therapy, cancer survival, anastomotic location, anastomotic leaks, and operative mortality.

Results: Cervical anastomoses were done in 19 patients and thoracic anastomoses were done in the other 55 patients. The two groups were similar with respect to age, gender, histology, stage, adjuvant therapy, and overall survival. Operative mortality for the entire group of 74 patients was 4% (3 patients). Resection margins were positive for residual tumor in 2 of 19 (11%) patients with cervical anastomoses and 9 of 55 (16%) patients with thoracic anastomoses (p=0.42). Leaks complicated 1 of 19 (5%) cervical and 9 of 55 (16%) thoracic esophagogastric anastomoses (p=0.21). Positive resection margins and anastomotic leaks were not significantly related (p=0.54). One of 9 (11%) leaks in the thoracic group proved fatal.

Conclusions: In our experience cervical esophagogastric anastomoses do not have a higher incidence of leaks than thoracic anastomoses.

Citing Articles

Efficiency and Complications of Esophageal Stenting in the Management of Postoperative Fistulas.

Rosianu C, Puscasu A, Hoara P, Predescu D, Birla R, Achim F J Clin Med. 2024; 13(20).

PMID: 39458117 PMC: 11508254. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13206167.


Trans-thoracic versus trans-hiatal resection for oesophageal carcinoma: a retrospective comparative study of a single-centre case series.

Baram A, Sherzad H Cardiothorac Surg. 2024; 28(1):25.

PMID: 38624644 PMC: 7686938. DOI: 10.1186/s43057-020-00035-y.


Comparison of the clinical outcomes after esophagectomy between intrathoracic anastomosis and cervical anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ge Q, Wu Y, Cong Z, Qiang Y, Wang Y, Zheng C BMC Surg. 2022; 22(1):417.

PMID: 36476138 PMC: 9730664. DOI: 10.1186/s12893-022-01875-7.


Role of intraoperative feeding jejunostomy in esophageal cancer surgery.

Kim M, Shin S, Kim H, Choi Y, Zo J, Shim Y J Cardiothorac Surg. 2022; 17(1):191.

PMID: 35987831 PMC: 9392926. DOI: 10.1186/s13019-022-01944-1.


Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak in patients after oesophagectomy: the SEAL score.

Ubels S, Verstegen M, Klarenbeek B, Bouwense S, van Berge Henegouwen M, Daams F Br J Surg. 2022; 109(9):864-871.

PMID: 35759409 PMC: 10364775. DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znac226.