» Articles » PMID: 33283041

Comparison of Preoperative CT Colonography and Colonoscopy for Esophageal Reconstruction with Colonic Interposition

Overview
Journal Surg Res Pract
Publisher Wiley
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2020 Dec 7
PMID 33283041
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Colonic evaluation is an essential step before proceeding with esophagectomy to reconstruct by colonic interposition. Colonoscopy is the standard practice for colorectal cancer screening, but it has a chance of failing cecal intubation and carries a risk of horrific adverse events by colonic perforation. CT colonography is a less invasive alternative method reported as useful for colonoscopic screening in cases of average risk of colorectal cancer. This study set out to report our clinical experience and to evaluate CT colonography in the preoperative process for colonic interposition of esophagectomy patients. Data for esophagectomy with colonic interposition patients were retrospectively analyzed and compared the colonoscopy group with the CT colonography group. During eight years, 31 patients, 12 patients in the colonoscopy group and 19 patients in the CT colonography group, included in this study. In both groups, the patient demographic data, procedures, and outcomes were not different. After colonic interposition, endoscopy was performed, and no lesions of conduits were detected. CT colonography is a minimally invasive and reliable option for colonic evaluation method for the patient of average colorectal cancer risk who has undergone esophagectomy with colonic interposition.

Citing Articles

Colorectal adenocarcinoma of the interposed colon after esophagectomy in infancy: a case report.

Schraps N, Mercanoglu B, Giannou A, Witthoft T, Hackert T, Melling N J Surg Case Rep. 2024; 2024(8):rjae516.

PMID: 39183785 PMC: 11342859. DOI: 10.1093/jscr/rjae516.


Long term outcome of a subcutaneous colonic interposition after pharyngo-laryngectomy for strictures of the larynx and hypopharynx resulting from caustic ingestion: A case report.

Bisquera Jr O, Perez A, Espiritu N, Guillermo M, Perez M Int J Surg Case Rep. 2022; 95:107215.

PMID: 35609478 PMC: 9126773. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2022.107215.

References
1.
Mine S, Udagawa H, Tsutsumi K, Kinoshita Y, Ueno M, Ehara K . Colon interposition after esophagectomy with extended lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009; 88(5):1647-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.05.081. View

2.
Park H, Hong J, Kim H, Kim B, Park S, Jo K . Predictive factors affecting cecal intubation failure in colonoscopy trainees. BMC Med Educ. 2013; 13:5. PMC: 3560110. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-13-5. View

3.
Kitagawa Y, Uno T, Oyama T, Kato K, Kato H, Kawakubo H . Esophageal cancer practice guidelines 2017 edited by the Japan esophageal society: part 2. Esophagus. 2018; 16(1):25-43. PMC: 6510875. DOI: 10.1007/s10388-018-0642-8. View

4.
Klink C, Binnebosel M, Schneider M, Ophoff K, Schumpelick V, Jansen M . Operative outcome of colon interposition in the treatment of esophageal cancer: a 20-year experience. Surgery. 2009; 147(4):491-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2009.10.045. View

5.
IJspeert J, Tutein Nolthenius C, Kuipers E, van Leerdam M, Nio C, Thomeer M . CT-Colonography vs. Colonoscopy for Detection of High-Risk Sessile Serrated Polyps. Am J Gastroenterol. 2016; 111(4):516-22. DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2016.58. View