» Articles » PMID: 23212741

Long-gap Esophageal Atresia: a Meta-analysis of Jejunal Interposition, Colon Interposition, and Gastric Pull-up

Overview
Publisher Thieme
Specialty Pediatrics
Date 2012 Dec 6
PMID 23212741
Citations 23
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Aim: There is still no consensus about the optimal surgical approach for esophageal replacement in the case of long-gap esophageal atresia (LGEA) or extensive corrosive strictures. The aim of this article was to perform a meta-analysis comparing the most widely used techniques for esophageal replacement in children: jejunal interposition (JI), colon interposition (CI), and gastric pull-up (GPU).

Methods: Review of the English-language literature published in the past 5 years about esophageal replacement in children was done. The focus was on postoperative survival rate, morbidity (gastrointestinal complications such as anastomotic stenosis/leakage and respiratory complications such as pneumothorax, pneumonia, and atelectasis), and long-term follow-up when available. Among long-term gastrointestinal outcomes were dysphagia, reflux, and dumping; among long-term respiratory outcomes were recurrent pneumonia and recurrent aspiration leading to chronic lung disease. Data were computed by Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (Version 2.2.064).

Main Results: A total of 15 studies (4 comparative retrospective, 8 retrospective, and 3 prospective) including 470 patients (264 LGEA) were identified; 344 (73%) patients underwent CI, 99 (21%) GPU, and 27 (6%) JI. Among these 15 studies, 9 provided data about long-term follow-up.

Conclusion: Proper prospective comparative studies are lacking. GPU and CI appear comparable regarding postoperative mortality, anastomotic complications, and graft loss. On the long-term, GPU seems to be associated with a higher respiratory morbidity but fewer gastrointestinal complications than CI. Based on this article only two series provide data about JI, and they show highly divergent results. JI appears to be a valid replacement technique when performed by experienced centers; however larger numbers are needed to assess the outcomes of this procedure.

Citing Articles

Experience in the treatment of type C congenital esophageal atresia using a staged approach.

Zhao Y, Tan S, Wang A, Li S, Liao J, Wang D BMC Surg. 2025; 25(1):35.

PMID: 39833789 PMC: 11749454. DOI: 10.1186/s12893-025-02771-6.


Impact of serial clinical swallow evaluations and feeding interventions on growth and feeding outcomes in children with long-gap esophageal atresia after anastomosis: a retrospective cohort study.

Wang J, Huang R, Tang C, Wu W, Li F, Ren T World J Pediatr. 2024; 20(12):1293-1305.

PMID: 39542969 PMC: 11634968. DOI: 10.1007/s12519-024-00850-x.


Experience in the treatment of long-gap esophageal atresia by intraluminal esophageal stretching elongation.

Zhang N, Wu W, Zhuang Y, Wang W, Pan W, Wang J Front Pediatr. 2024; 12:1367935.

PMID: 38523834 PMC: 10957633. DOI: 10.3389/fped.2024.1367935.


Management of long-gap esophageal atresia.

Penikis A, Sescleifer A, Kunisaki S Transl Pediatr. 2024; 13(2):329-342.

PMID: 38455743 PMC: 10915436. DOI: 10.21037/tp-23-453.


Long-term follow-up after retrosternal ileocolic esophagoplasty in two cases of long-gap esophageal atresia: why it is still a valid option as a rescue strategy.

Leonard M, Deswysen Y, Scheers I, Thoma M, de Magnee C, Stephenne X Front Pediatr. 2023; 11:1300802.

PMID: 38078333 PMC: 10702588. DOI: 10.3389/fped.2023.1300802.