» Articles » PMID: 28573178

Endoscopic Esophagogastric Anastomosis with Luminal Apposition Axios Stent (LAS) Approach: a New Concept for Hybrid "Lewis Santy"

Overview
Journal Endosc Int Open
Specialty Gastroenterology
Date 2017 Jun 3
PMID 28573178
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background And Study Aims: Esophagogastric anastomosis (EGA) has a high risk of leakage. Based upon our experience in endoscopic gastrojejunal anastomosis using LAS, the aim of this study was to verify the technical feasibility and the safety of performing an EGA using a hybrid approach (endoscopic and surgical).

Materials And Methods: A pilot prospective study was performed on 8 survival pigs. The procedure was carried out in 2 stages: (i) surgical step consisting of an esogastrectomy by laparotomy with separated suture of the esophagus and stomach; (ii) endoscopic esophagogastric anastomosis using the LAS. The first 2 pigs allowed for the setting of the 2 steps procedure, and 6 were included in the study for assessing the efficacy and safety of the procedure with a 3-week survival course. The primary endpoint was morbidity and mortality.

Results: All procedures were successfull. The mean operative time was 98 minutes, with a mean endoscopic time of 46 minutes. Three early deaths occurred within the first weeks, unrelated to the LAS anastomosis. At 3 weeks, endoscopic assessment followed by necropsy demonstrated the right position and the endoscopic removability of the stent with good patency of the esophagogastric anastomosis, without leakage of the endoscopic suture. Pathological examination confirmed the patency of the anastomosis with fusion of mucosal and muscle layers.

Conclusion: Endoscopic esophagogastric anastomosis with LAS is feasible and reproducible, without anastomotic leakage. It could be a new alternative to perform safe anastomoses, as part of a hybrid approach (surgical and endoscopic).

Citing Articles

Feasibility and patency of echoendoscopic anastomoses with lumen apposing metal stents depending on the gastrointestinal segment involved.

Betes M, Perez-Longo P, Peralta S, Bojorquez A, Angos R, Chopitea A Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):3992.

PMID: 33597612 PMC: 7889646. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-83618-x.

References
1.
Biere S, van Berge Henegouwen M, Maas K, Bonavina L, Rosman C, Garcia J . Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012; 379(9829):1887-92. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60516-9. View

2.
von Renteln D, Vassiliou M, McKenna D, Suriawinata A, Swain C, Rothstein R . Endoscopic vs. laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy for duodenal obstruction: a randomized study in a porcine model. Endoscopy. 2011; 44(2):161-8. DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1291447. View

3.
Bailey S, Bull D, Harpole D, Rentz J, Neumayer L, Pappas T . Outcomes after esophagectomy: a ten-year prospective cohort. Ann Thorac Surg. 2003; 75(1):217-22; discussion 222. DOI: 10.1016/s0003-4975(02)04368-0. View

4.
Luketich J, Alvelo-Rivera M, Buenaventura P, Christie N, McCaughan J, Litle V . Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg. 2003; 238(4):486-94. PMC: 1360107. DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000089858.40725.68. View

5.
Mariette C, Triboulet J . [Complications following oesophagectomy: mechanism, detection, treatment and prevention]. J Chir (Paris). 2006; 142(6):348-54. DOI: 10.1016/s0021-7697(05)80955-x. View