» Articles » PMID: 15746747

Does Esophagogastric Anastomotic Technique Influence the Outcome of Patients with Esophageal Cancer?

Overview
Date 2005 Mar 5
PMID 15746747
Citations 38
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: We sought to compare the outcome of patients with esophageal cancer who had either modified Collard or standard hand-sewn cervical esophagogastric anastomoses in reconstruction during esophagectomy.

Methods: From March of 1996 to October of 2002, 274 patients with esophageal cancer underwent esophagectomy with gastric replacement and cervical esophagogastric anastomosis. Beginning in March of 2001, a modified Collard technique (stapled) was used in most patients (n = 86) for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis; a standard hand-sewn technique (sewn) was used in all others (n = 188). Using a propensity score based on 8 variables (age, gender, race, surgeon, surgical approach, pathologic stage, histologic cell type, and induction chemoradiotherapy), 85 patient pairs were matched and followed for time-related events. Outcome comparisons included cervical wound infection, cervical anastomotic leak, other hospital complications, length of stay, anastomotic dilatation, reflux symptoms, and survival.

Results: At 30 days, freedom from cervical wound infection was 92% for stapled versus 71% for sewn anastomoses ( P = .001), and freedom from cervical anastomotic leak was 96% versus 89% ( P = .09), respectively. Other hospital complications occurred in 58% and 49%, respectively ( P = .17). Median length of stay was 10 days for both ( P = .3). At 2 years, freedom from anastomotic dilatation was 34% for stapled versus 10% for sewn anastomoses ( P < .0001), and the mean number of dilatations per patient was 2.4 versus 4.1 ( P = .0001), respectively. Reflux was rare for both. Thirty-day, 6-month, and 24-month survivals were 98%, 91%, and 77% for stapled anastomoses and 98%, 88%, and 69% for sewn anastomoses ( P = .3).

Conclusions: The modified Collard anastomotic technique dramatically reduces morbidity after esophagectomy. It should replace hand-sewn esophagogastric anastomoses.

Citing Articles

Comparative analysis of manual vs. mechanical suturing techniques in esophagectomy: A propensity score‑matched study of long‑term outcomes.

Lu S, Li K, Jiang L, Xiong J, Liang S, Wang Z Oncol Lett. 2024; 29(1):51.

PMID: 39564370 PMC: 11574709. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2024.14797.


Which Anastomotic Techniques Is the Best Choice for Cervical Esophagogastric Anastomosis in Esophagectomy? A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.

Chen B, Xia P, Tang W, Huang S J Gastrointest Surg. 2022; 27(2):422-432.

PMID: 36417036 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-022-05482-y.


Operative outcomes and long-term survival of patients undergoing colon interposition after esophagectomy for cancer.

Akutsu T, Fujita T, Kajiyama D, Ozaki A, Sato K, Fujiwara H Thorac Cancer. 2022; 13(6):844-852.

PMID: 35088520 PMC: 8930463. DOI: 10.1111/1759-7714.14332.


Comparison of circular stapling, triangulating stapling and T-shape stapling for cervical anastomosis with minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Tian Y, Li L, Li S, Tian H, Lu M Ann Transl Med. 2021; 8(24):1679.

PMID: 33490191 PMC: 7812162. DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-7278.


A single blinded randomized controlled trial comparing semi-mechanical with hand-sewn cervical anastomosis after esophagectomy for cancer (SHARE-study).

Nederlof N, Tilanus H, de Vringer T, van Lanschot J, Willemsen S, Hop W J Surg Oncol. 2020; 122(8):1616-1623.

PMID: 32989770 PMC: 7821322. DOI: 10.1002/jso.26209.