Ischemic Gastric Conditioning by Preoperative Arterial Embolization Before Oncologic Esophagectomy: A Single-Center Experience

The Effect of Laparoscopic Gastric Ischemic Preconditioning Prior to Esophagectomy on Anastomotic Stricture Rate and Comparison with Esophagectomy-Alone Controls

BACKGROUND

Benign anastomotic stricture is a recognized complication following esophagectomy. Laparoscopic gastric ischemic preconditioning (LGIP) prior to esophagectomy has been associated with decreased anastomotic leak rates; however, its effect on stricture and the need for subsequent endoscopic intervention is not well studied.

METHODS

This was a case-control study at an academic medical center using consecutive patients undergoing oncologic esophagectomies (July 2012-July 2022). Our institution initiated an LGIP protocol on 1 January 2021. The primary outcome was the occurrence of stricture within 1 year of esophagectomy, while secondary outcomes were stricture severity and frequency of interventions within the 6 months following stricture. Bivariable comparisons were performed using Chi-square, Fisher's exact, or Mann-Whitney U tests. Multivariable regression controlling for confounders was performed to generate risk-adjust odds ratios and to identify the independent effect of LGIP.

RESULTS

Of 253 esophagectomies, 42 (16.6%) underwent LGIP prior to esophagectomy. There were 45 (17.7%) anastomotic strictures requiring endoscopic intervention, including three patients who underwent LGIP and 42 who did not. Median time to stricture was 144 days. Those who underwent LGIP were significantly less likely to develop anastomotic stricture (7.1% vs. 19.9%; p = 0.048). After controlling for confounders, this difference was no longer significant (odds ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.14-1.82; p = 0.29). Of those who developed stricture, there was a trend toward less severe strictures and decreased need for endoscopic dilation in the LGIP group (all p < 0.20).

CONCLUSION

LGIP may reduce the rate and severity of symptomatic anastomotic stricture following esophagectomy. A multi-institutional trial evaluating the effect of LGIP on stricture and other anastomotic complications is warranted.

Short-term Outcomes of Different Techniques for Gastric Ischemic Preconditioning Before Esophagectomy: A Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Ischemia at the anastomotic site plays a critical role determinant in the development of anastomosis-related complications after esophagectomy. Gastric ischemic conditioning (GIC) before esophagectomy has been described to improve the vascular perfusion at the tip of the gastric conduit with a potential effect on anastomotic leak (AL) and stenosis (AS) risk minimization. Laparoscopic (LapGIC) and angioembolization (AngioGIC) techniques have been reported.

PURPOSE

Compare short-term outcomes among different GIC techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Systematic review and network meta-analysis. One-step esophagectomy (noGIC), LapGIC, and AngioGIC were compared. Primary outcomes were AL, AS, and gastric conduit necrosis (GCN). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were used to assess relative inference.

RESULTS

Overall, 1760 patients (14 studies) were included. Of those, 1028 patients (58.4%) underwent noGIC, 593 (33.6%) LapGIC, and 139 (8%) AngioGIC. AL was reduced for LapGIC versus noGIC (RR=0.68; 95% CrI 0.47-0.98) and AngioGIC versus noGIC (RR=0.52; 95% CrI 0.31-0.93). Similarly, AS was reduced for LapGIC versus noGIC (RR=0.32; 95% CrI 0.12-0.68) and AngioGIC versus noGIC (RR=1.30; 95% CrI 0.65-2.46). The indirect comparison, assessed with the network methodology, did not show any differences for LapGIC versus AngioGIC in terms of postoperative AL and AS risk. No differences were found for GCN, pulmonary complications, overall complications, hospital length of stay, and 30-day mortality among different treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to noGIC, both LapGIC and AngioGIC before esophagectomy seem equivalent and associated with a reduced risk for postoperative AL and AS.

Pilot Trial on Ischemic Conditioning of the Gastric Conduit in Esophageal Cancer: Feasibility and Impact on Anastomotic Leakage (TIGOAL-I)

Objective

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of gastric conditioning using preoperative arterial embolization (PAE) before McKeown esophagectomy at a tertiary university hospital.

Background

Cervical anastomotic leakage (AL) is a common complication of esophagectomy. Limited clinical evidence suggests that gastric conditioning mitigates this risk.

Methods

This pilot randomized clinical trial was conducted between April 2016 and October 2021 at a single-center tertiary hospital. Eligible patients with resectable malignant esophageal tumors, suitable for cervical esophagogastrostomy, were randomized into 2 groups: one receiving PAE and the other standard treatment. The primary endpoints were PAE-related complications and incidence of cervical AL.

Results

The study enrolled 40 eligible patients. PAE-related morbidity was 10%, with no Clavien-Dindo grade III complications. Cervical AL rates were similar between the groups (35% vs 25%, P = 0.49), even when conduit necrosis was included (35% vs 35%, P = 1). However, AL severity, including conduit necrosis, was higher in the control group according to the Clavien-Dindo ≥IIIb (5% vs 30%, P = 0.029) and Comprehensive Complication Index (20.9 vs 33.7, P = 0.01). No significant differences were found in other postoperative complications, such as pneumonia or postoperative mortality.

Conclusions

PAE is a feasible and safe method for gastric conditioning before McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy and shows promise for preventing severe AL. However, further studies are required to confirm its efficacy.

Effect of gastric ischemic conditioning prior to esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Ischemia at the anastomotic site is thought to be a protagonist in the development of anastomosis-related complications while different strategies to overcome this problem have been reported. Gastric ischemic conditioning (GIC) prior to esophagectomy has been described with this intent. Evaluate the effect of GIC on anastomotic complications after esophagectomy. Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PubMed were investigated up to March 31st, 2023. We considered articles that appraised short-term outcomes after GIC vs. no GIC in patients undergoing esophagectomy. Anastomotic leak (AL), anastomotic stricture (AS), and gastric conduit necrosis (GCN) were primary outcomes. Risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were used to calculate related inference. Fourteen studies (1760 patients) were included. Of those, 732 (41.6%) underwent GIC, while 1028 (58.4%) underwent one-step esophagectomy. Compared with no GIC, GIC was related to a reduced RR for AL (R RR = 0.63; 95% CI 0.47-0.86; p < 0.01) and AS (RR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.29-0.91; p = 0.02), whereas no differences were found for GCN (RR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.19-1.61; p = 0.28). Postoperative pneumonia (RR = 1.09; p = 0.99), overall complications (RR = 0.87; p = 0.19), operative time (SMD - 0.58; p = 0.07), hospital stay (SMD 0.66; p = 0.09), and 30-day mortality (RR = 0.69; p = 0.22) were comparable. GIC prior to esophagectomy seems associated with a reduced risk for AL and AS. Further studies are necessary to identify the subset of patients who can benefit from this procedure, the optimal technique, and the timing of GIC prior to esophagectomy.

Prospective Evaluation of a Universally Applied Laparoscopic Gastric Ischemic Preconditioning Protocol Prior to Esophagectomy with Comparison with Historical Controls

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak after esophagectomy is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Our institution began performing laparoscopic gastric ischemic preconditioning (LGIP) with ligation of the left gastric and short gastric vessels prior to esophagectomy in all patients presenting with resectable esophageal cancer. We hypothesized that LGIP may decrease the incidence and severity of anastomotic leak.

METHODS

Patients were prospectively evaluated following the universal application of LGIP prior to esophagectomy protocol in January 2021 until August 2022. Outcomes were compared with patients who underwent esophagectomy without LGIP from a prospectively maintained database from 2010 to 2020.

RESULTS

We compared 42 patients who underwent LGIP followed by esophagectomy with 222 who underwent esophagectomy without LGIP. Age, sex, comorbidities, and clinical stage were similar between groups. Outpatient LGIP was generally well tolerated, with one patient experiencing prolonged gastroparesis. Median time from LGIP to esophagectomy was 31 days. Mean operative time and blood loss were not significantly different between groups. Patients who underwent LGIP were significantly less likely to develop an anastomotic leak following esophagectomy (7.1% vs. 20.7%, p = 0.038). This finding persisted on multivariate analysis [odds ratio (OR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03-0.42, p = 0.029]. The occurrence of any post-esophagectomy complication was similar between groups (40.5% vs. 46.0%, p = 0.514), but patients who underwent LGIP had shorter length of stay [10 (9-11) vs. 12 (9-15), p = 0.020].

CONCLUSIONS

LGIP prior to esophagectomy is associated with a decreased risk of anastomotic leak and length of hospital stay. Further, multi-institutional studies are warranted to confirm these findings.

Transarterial Embolization for Active Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Predictors of Early Mortality and Early Rebleeding

Background: The aim of this study was to determine predictive factors of early mortality and early rebleeding (≤30 days) following transarterial embolization (TAE) for treatment of acute gastrointestinal bleeding. Methods: All consecutive patients admitted for acute gastrointestinal bleeding to the interventional radiology department in a tertiary center between January 2012 and January 2022 were included. Exclusion criteria were patients: (1) aged < 18-year-old, (2) referred to the operation room without TAE, (3) treated for hemobilia, (4) with mesenteric hematoma, (5) lost to follow-up within 30 days after the procedure. We evaluated pre and per-procedure clinical data, biological data, outcomes, and complications. Results: Sixty-eight patients were included: 55 (80.9%) experienced upper gastrointestinal bleeding and 13 (19.1%) lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Median age was 69 (61−74) years. There were 49 (72%) males. Median hemoglobin was 7.25 (6.1−8.3) g/dL. There were 30 (50%) ulcers. Coils were used in 46 (67.6%) procedures. Early mortality was 15 (22.1%) and early rebleeding was 17 (25%). In multivariate analysis, hyperlactatemia (≥2 mmol/L) were predictive of early mortality (≤30 days). A high number of red blood cells units was associated with early rebleeding. Conclusion: This study identified some predictive factors of 30-day mortality and early rebleeding following TAE. This will assist in patient selection and may help improve the management of gastrointestinal bleeding.

A pilot randomized controlled trial on the utility of gastric conditioning in the prevention of esophagogastric anastomotic leak after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. The APIL_2013 Trial

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Preoperative gastric conditioning (GC) improves blood perfusion of the gastroplasty, one of the most important factors for anastomotic viability. This pilot randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the feasibility of GC before oesophageal surgery in patients with oesophageal cancer or Siewert I-II esophagogastric junction cancer, who required an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a randomized (1:1), open-label, single-centre, controlled, parallel-group, pilot clinical trial. Two study groups: 1) GC-group: patients who underwent an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and GC before surgery; 2) Surgery alone (SA)-group: patients who underwent only Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Feasibility was assessed by means of the number of patients in whom a GC was performed, and the cumulative incidence of postoperative AL. Secondary endpoints were conduit necrosis (CN), hospital stay, morbidity, mortality, and anastomotic stricture.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2018, 38 patients were randomized and analysed: 20 to GC-group and 18 to SA-group. 17 GCs (85%) were successfully performed, right gastric artery occlusion failed in three patients. Morbidity after GC occurred in 5/22 patients (all Clavien-Dindo ≤ IIIa). The cumulative incidence of AL was 15.0% (3/20, 95%CI: 5.2-36.0%) in GC-group and 33.3% (6/18, 95%CI: 16.3-56.3%) in SA-group, p-value: 0.184. CN: 0/20 vs. 1/18 (p-value: 0.474); surgical morbidity (Clavien-Dindo III-V): 7/20 vs. 12/18 (p-value: 0.070); hospital stay (median [range] days): 12 [9-45] vs. 27.5 [10-166] (p-value: 0.067). When only successful GCs (three arteries) were included for analysis, ischemia-related gastric conduit failure (AL and CN) was lower in the GC group (p-value: 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative arteriographic GC before Ivor Lewis esophagectomy is a feasible and safe procedure and seems it may reduce AL in patients with oesophageal cancer or Siewert I-II esophagogastric junction cancer.

Inferior mesenteric artery embolization ahead of rectal cancer surgery: AMIREMBOL pilot study

Ischaemic conditioning in rectal cancer surgery by preoperative embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery is feasible and safe. It seems to protect from ischaemic stress during the surgical procedure.

The ISCON-trial protocol: laparoscopic ischemic conditioning prior to esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer and arterial calcifications

Background

Anastomotic leakage is the most important surgical complication following esophagectomy. A major cause of leakage is ischemia of the gastric tube that is used for reconstruction of the gastrointestinal tract. Generalized cardiovascular disease, expressed by calcifications of the aorta and celiac axis stenosis on a pre-operative CT scan, is associated with an increased risk of anastomotic leakage. Laparoscopic ischemic conditioning (ISCON) aims to redistribute blood flow and increase perfusion at the anastomotic site by occluding the left gastric, left gastroepiploic and short gastric arteries prior to esophagectomy. This study aims to assess the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic ISCON in selected patients with esophageal cancer and concomitant arterial calcifications.

Methods

In this prospective single-arm safety and feasibility trial based upon the IDEAL recommendations for surgical innovation, a total of 20 patients will be included recruited in 2 European high-volume centers for esophageal cancer surgery. Patients with resectable esophageal carcinoma (cT1-4a, N0–3, M0) with “major calcifications” of the thoracic aorta accordingly to the Uniform Calcification Score (UCS) or a stenosis of the celiac axis accordingly to the modified North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) score on preoperative CT scan, who are planned to undergo esophagectomy are eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome variables are complications grade 2 and higher (Clavien-Dindo classification) occurring during or after laparoscopic ISCON and before esophagectomy. Secondary outcomes include intra- and postoperative complications of esophagectomy and the induction of angiogenesis by biomarkers of microcirculation and redistribution of blood flow by measurement of indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence angiography.

Discussion

We hypothesize that in selected patients with impaired vascularization of the gastric tube, laparoscopic ISCON is feasible and can be safely performed 12–18 days prior to esophagectomy. Depending on the results, a randomized controlled trial will be needed to investigate whether ISCON leads to a lower percentage and less severe course of anastomotic leakage in selected patients.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03896399. Registered 4 January 2019.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09231-x.

Gastric ischemic conditioning prior to esophagectomy reduces anastomotic leaks and strictures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Gastric ischemic conditioning (GIC) is a strategy to promote neovascularization of the gastric conduit to reduce the risk of anastomotic complications following esophagectomy. Despite a number of studies and reviews published on the concept of ischemic conditioning, there remains no clear consensus regarding its utility. We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the impact of GIC, particularly on anastomotic leaks, conduit ischemia, and strictures.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library was performed on February 5th, 2020 by a university librarian after selection of key search terms with the research team. Inclusion criteria included human participants undergoing esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction, age ≥ 18, N ≥ 5, and GIC performed prior to esophagectomy. Our primary outcome of interest was anastomotic leaks. Our secondary outcome was gastric conduit ischemia, anastomotic strictures, and overall survival. Meta-analysis was performed with RevMan 5.4.1 using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 1712 preliminary studies were identified and 23 studies included for final review. GIC was performed in 1178 (53.5%) patients. Meta-analysis revealed reduced odds of anastomotic leaks (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.46-0.97; I² = 5%; p = 0.03) and anastomotic strictures (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.29-0.80; I² = 65%; p = 0.005). Meta-analysis revealed no difference in odds of conduit ischemia (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.13-1.23; I² = 0%; p = 0.11) and no difference in odds of overall survival (OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.29-1.02; I² = 22%; p = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

GIC is associated with reduced odds of anastomotic leaks and anastomotic strictures and may decrease morbidity in patients undergoing esophagectomy. Further prospective randomized trials are needed to better identify the optimal patient population, timing, and techniques used to best achieve GIC.

A Novel Technique to Improve Anastomotic Perfusion Prior to Esophageal Surgery: Hybrid Ischemic Preconditioning of the Stomach. Preclinical Efficacy Proof in a Porcine Survival Model

Simple Summary

Esophagectomy has a high rate of anastomotic complications thought to be caused by poor perfusion of the gastric graft, which is used to restore the continuity of the gastrointestinal tract. Ischemic gastric preconditioning (IGP), performed by partially destroying preoperatively the gastric vessels either by means of interventional radiology or surgically, might improve the gastric conduit perfusion. Both approaches have downsides. The timing, extent and mechanism of IGP remain unclear. A novel hybrid IGP method combining the advantages of the endovascular and surgical approach was introduced in this study. IGP improves unequivocally the mucosal and serosal blood-flow at the gastric conduit fundus by triggering new vessels formation. The proposed timing and extent of IGP were efficacious and might be easily applied to humans. This novel minimally invasive IGP technique might reduce the anastomotic leak rate of patients undergoing esophagectomy, thus improving their overall oncological outcome.

Abstract

Esophagectomy often presents anastomotic leaks (AL), due to tenuous perfusion of gastric conduit fundus (GCF). Hybrid (endovascular/surgical) ischemic gastric preconditioning (IGP), might improve GCF perfusion. Sixteen pigs undergoing IGP were randomized: (1) Max-IGP (n = 6): embolization of left gastric artery (LGA), right gastric artery (RGA), left gastroepiploic artery (LGEA), and laparoscopic division (LapD) of short gastric arteries (SGA); (2) Min-IGP (n = 5): LGA-embolization, SGA-LapD; (3) Sham (n = 5): angiography, laparoscopy. At day 21 gastric tubulation occurred and GCF perfusion was assessed as: (A) Serosal-tissue-oxygenation (StO₂) by hyperspectral-imaging; (B) Serosal time-to-peak (TTP) by fluorescence-imaging; (C) Mucosal functional-capillary-density-area (FCD-A) index by confocal-laser-endomicroscopy. Local capillary lactates (LCL) were sampled. Neovascularization was assessed (histology/immunohistochemistry). Sham presented lower StO₂ and FCD-A index (41 ± 10.6%; 0.03 ± 0.03 respectively) than min-IGP (66.2 ± 10.2%, p-value = 0.004; 0.22 ± 0.02, p-value < 0.0001 respectively) and max-IGP (63.8 ± 9.4%, p-value = 0.006; 0.2 ± 0.02, p-value < 0.0001 respectively). Sham had higher LCL (9.6 ± 4.8 mL/mol) than min-IGP (4 ± 3.1, p-value = 0.04) and max-IGP (3.4 ± 1.5, p-value = 0.02). For StO₂, FCD-A, LCL, max- and min-IGP did not differ. Sham had higher TTP (24.4 ± 4.9 s) than max-IGP (10 ± 1.5 s, p-value = 0.0008) and min-IGP (14 ± 1.7 s, non-significant). Max- and min-IGP did not differ. Neovascularization was confirmed in both IGP groups. Hybrid IGP improves GCF perfusion, potentially reducing post-esophagectomy AL.

Gastric ischemic preconditioning may reduce the incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage after οesophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy is a severe and life-threatening complication. Gastric ischemic preconditioning is a strategy for the improvement of anastomotic healing. Aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to investigate the impact of gastric ischemic preconditioning on postoperative morbidity. A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies comparing patients undergoing gastric ischemic preconditioning before esophagectomy with nonpreconditioned patients. Meta-analysis was conducted for the overall incidence of anastomotic leakage, severe anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, postoperative morbidity, and mortality. Mantel-Haenszel odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Subgroup analyses were performed concerning preconditioning technique, the interval between preconditioning and surgery and the extent of preconditioning. Fifteen cohort studies were identified. Gastric preconditioning was associated with reduced overall incidence of anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI, 0.53-1.0; P = 0.050) and severe anastomotic leakage (OR 0.27; 95% CI, 0.14-0.50; P < 0.010), but not with anastomotic stricture (OR 1.18; 95% CI 0.38 to 3.66; P = 0.780), major postoperative morbidity (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.45 to 2.36; P = 0.940) or mortality (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.39 to 1,23; P = 0.210). Subgroup analyses did not identify any differences between embolization and ligation while increasing the interval between preconditioning and esophagectomy as well as the extent of preconditioning might be beneficial. Gastric ischemic preconditioning may be associated with a reduced incidence of overall and severe anastomotic leakage. Randomized studies are necessary to further evaluate its impact on leakage, refine the technique and define patient populations that will benefit the most.

Critical appraisal of gastric conduit ischaemic conditioning (GIC) prior to oesophagectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Anastomotic leaks remain a major complication following oesophagectomy, accounting for high morbidity and mortality. Recently, gastric ischaemic conditioning (GIC) has been proposed to improve anastomotic integrity through neovascularisation of the gastric conduit. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to determine the impact of GIC on postoperative outcomes following oesophagectomy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies reporting GIC for any indication of oesophageal resection up to April 25, 2019. The primary outcome was anastomotic leak. Secondary outcomes were conduit necrosis, anastomotic strictures, overall and major complications or in-hospital mortality. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects modelling.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies reported on GIC, of which 13 were comparative studies. GIC was performed through ligation in 13 studies and embolisation in six studies. GIC did not appear to reduce anastomotic leakages (OR 0.80, CI_95: 0.51-1.24, p = 0.3), anastomotic strictures (OR 0.75, CI_95: 0.35-1.60, p = 0.5), overall complications (OR 1.02, CI_95: 0.48-2.16, p = 0.9), major complications (OR 1.06, CI_95: 0.53-2.11, p = 0.9), or in-hospital mortality (OR 0.70, CI_95: 0.32-1.53, p = 0.4). However, GIC was associated with reduced rates of conduit necrosis (OR 0.30, CI_95: 0.11-0.77, p = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

GIC does not appear to reduce overall rates of anastomotic leakage after oesophagectomy but seems to reduce severity of leakages. More in depth studies are recommended.

Ischaemic conditioning of the stomach previous to esophageal surgery

A gastric conduit is most frequently used for reconstruction in oesophageal surgery, and ischemia of the conduit is the most fragile aspect of the esophagogastric anastomosis with as consequence the anastomotic leakage. In order to avoid it, the concept of ischaemic conditioning of the stomach previous to surgery has been designed. The basis of ischemic conditioning is that interrupting vascularization of the stomach before making the anastomosis eases the gastric fundus adaptation to ischemic conditions. It consists of the interruption of the principal feeding arteries of the stomach (except the right gastroepiploic artery) weeks before esophagectomy. Previously published literature contemplates two different techniques: angiographic embolization or laparoscopic ligation or division of vessels. In this study, the anatomic and physio-pathologic background of ischemic preconditioning is described and the published current evidence is reviewed.