» Articles » PMID: 23073504

Thoracic Duct Injury Following Esophagectomy in Carcinoma of the Esophagus: Ligation by the Abdominal Approach

Overview
Journal World J Surg
Publisher Wiley
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2012 Oct 18
PMID 23073504
Citations 13
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Thoracic duct injury (TDI) is a potentially lethal complication of esophagectomy. There is no consensus regarding when and how to intervene in these injuries. Both thoracic and abdominal approaches have been used.

Methods: Esophagectomies performed for cancer of the esophagus (n = 104) from October 2003 to July 2011 were analyzed for TDI. Diagnosis, histological type, stage, and location of tumor, neoadjuvant therapy, trans-thoracic or trans-hiatal procedure performed, nature and amount of drain output, and levels of triglyceride in the effluent were analyzed. Management of these injuries and morbidity and mortality associated with the approach taken were reviewed.

Results: We observed chylothorax in 9 patients. All nine patients had undergone trans-hiatal esophagectomy. All patients eventually required surgical intervention. Mass ligation of the thoracic duct was performed via the thoracic route in three patients and via the trans-abdominal approach in six others. Thoracic duct ligation was successful in all patients. One patient required a second laparotomy and repeat ligation of the duct. There were two postoperative deaths; both these patients had ligation by the thoracic route.

Conclusions: Trans-abdominal ligation of the thoracic duct in patients with chylothorax after esophagectomy is technically easy and safe. It may be preferred over the trans-thoracic approach, especially after an initial trans-hiatal esophagectomy.

Citing Articles

Intervention lymphatic leakage after esophageal surgery due to esophageal cancer: A case report.

Hung D, Dung L, Truong N, Van Sy T, Hanh L, Loc T Radiol Case Rep. 2024; 19(12):5888-5892.

PMID: 39319174 PMC: 11421225. DOI: 10.1016/j.radcr.2024.08.044.


Transhiatal bilateral thoracic duct ligation for duplicated thoracic duct injury after esophagectomy: a case report.

Komatsuzaki S, Hisakura K, Ogawa K, Akashi Y, Kim J, Moue S Surg Case Rep. 2022; 8(1):213.

PMID: 36459305 PMC: 9718900. DOI: 10.1186/s40792-022-01567-7.


Post-esophagectomy chylothorax refractory to mass ligation of thoracic duct above diaphragm: a case report.

Wang S, Jiang W J Cardiothorac Surg. 2022; 17(1):259.

PMID: 36203167 PMC: 9540730. DOI: 10.1186/s13019-022-02001-7.


Risk Factors, Diagnosis and Management of Chyle Leak Following Esophagectomy for Cancers: An International Consensus Statement.

Kamarajah S, Siddaiah-Subramanya M, Parente A, Evans R, Adeyeye A, Ainsworth A Ann Surg Open. 2022; 3(3):e192.

PMID: 36199483 PMC: 9508983. DOI: 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000192.


Thoracic Duct Embolization for Delayed Chyle Leak After Lewis-Tanner Esophagectomy.

Franceschilli M, Argiro R, Siragusa L, Usai V, Sibio S, Di Carlo S Am J Case Rep. 2022; 23:e936590.

PMID: 35867626 PMC: 9319296. DOI: 10.12659/AJCR.936590.


References
1.
Schumacher G, Weidemann H, Langrehr J, Jonas S, Mittler J, Jacob D . Transabdominal ligation of the thoracic duct as treatment of choice for postoperative chylothorax after esophagectomy. Dis Esophagus. 2007; 20(1):19-23. DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2050.2007.00636.x. View

2.
Crosthwaite G, Joypaul B, Cuschieri A . Thoracoscopic management of thoracic duct injury. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1995; 40(5):303-4. View

3.
Dugue L, Sauvanet A, Farges O, Goharin A, Le Mee J, Belghiti J . Output of chyle as an indicator of treatment for chylothorax complicating oesophagectomy. Br J Surg. 1998; 85(8):1147-9. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2168.1998.00819.x. View

4.
Lai F, Chen L, Tu Y, Lin M, Li X . Prevention of chylothorax complicating extensive esophageal resection by mass ligation of thoracic duct: a random control study. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011; 91(6):1770-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.02.070. View

5.
Milsom J, Kron I, Rheuban K, Rodgers B . Chylothorax: an assessment of current surgical management. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1985; 89(2):221-7. View