"Supercharged" isoperistaltic colon interposition for long-segment esophageal reconstruction

Colonic interposition in esophagectomy: an ACS-NSQIP study

INTRODUCTION

For patients with cancer or injury of the esophagus, esophagectomy with reconstruction using the stomach (gastric pull-up, GPU) or colon (colonic interposition, CI) can restore function but is associated with high morbidity. We sought to describe the differences in outcomes between the two replacement organs using a national database.

METHODS

From ACS-NSQIP, patients who underwent GPU or CI between 2006 and 2020 were identified. Univariate analyses were performed on length of stay, complications, reoperation, readmission, and mortality. Variables with P ≤ 0.2 were included in the multivariate regression. Primary outcomes were 30-day reoperation, readmission, and mortality. Data were assessed using Chi-squared tests and logistic regression.

RESULTS

There were 12,545 GPU and 502 CI patients. GPU patients were older with higher BMI, and more likely to be male (80.3% versus 70.3%, P < 0.0001) and white (77.8% versus 69.1%, P < 0.0001). More GPU patients had independent functional status and underlying bleeding disorders, but fewer other preoperative comorbidities than CI patients. On univariate analysis, CI patients had longer hospital stays (13 versus 10 days, P < 0.0001); more reoperations (23.9% versus 14.5%, P < 0.0001); a lower rate of discharge to home (70.9% versus 82.1%, P < 0.0001); and a higher mortality rate (6.2% versus 2.9%, P < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, CI was associated with increased risk of reoperation but not with readmission or mortality. Reoperation was associated with CI, smoking, chronic wound, hypertension, higher ASA class, contaminated or dirty wound class, and longer operative time. Readmission was associated with female gender, hypertension, and longer operative time. Mortality was associated with age, metastatic cancer, preoperative sepsis, preoperative renal failure, malignant esophageal disease, higher ASA class, incomplete closure, and longer operative time.

CONCLUSION

Colonic interposition, although a more difficult option with traditionally worse outcomes, should still be considered for patients requiring esophagectomy if the stomach cannot be used to restore continuity, as differences in outcomes appear to be due to underlying frailty of patients rather than the procedure.

A Comparison of Different Types of Esophageal Reconstructions: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: A total esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction is the mainstream procedure for esophageal cancer. Colon interposition and free jejunal flap for esophageal reconstruction are the alternative choices when the gastric tube is not available. However, to date, a solution for the high anastomosis leakage rates among these three types of conduits has not been reported. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to investigate the rate of anastomotic leakage (AL) among the three procedures to determine the best esophageal substitute or the future direction for improving the conventional gastric pull-up (GPU). Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases. We included esophageal cancer patients receiving esophagectomy and excluded patients with other cancer. The random effect model was used in this network meta-analysis. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used for the quality assessment of studies in the network meta-analysis, and funnel plots were used to evaluate publication bias. The primary outcome is anastomosis leakage; the secondary outcomes are stricture formation, length of hospital stays, and mortality rate. Results: Nine studies involving 1613 patients were included in this network meta-analysis. The trend results indicated the following. Regarding anastomosis leakage, free jejunal flap was the better procedure; regarding stricture formation, colon interposition was the better procedure; regarding mortality rate, free jejunal flap was the better procedure; regarding length of hospital stay, gastric pull-up was the better treatment. Discussion: Overall, if technically accessible, free jejunal flap is a better choice than colon interposition when gastric conduit cannot be used, but further study should be conducted to compare groups with equal supercharged patients. In addition, jejunal flap (JF) cannot replace traditional gastric pull-up (GPU) due to technical complexities, more anastomotic sites, and longer operation times. However, the GPU method with the supercharged procedure would be a possible solution to lower postoperative AL. The limitation of this meta-analysis is that the number of articles included was low; we aim to update the result when new data are available. Funding: None. Registration: N/A.

Esophagectomy for End-Stage Achalasia

Esophagectomy for achalasia is reserved for patients with end-stage disease for whom prior treatment has failed. Esophagectomy can be performed safely through a variety of techniques. Conduit options include stomach, colon, and small intestine. There are many potential complications following esophagectomy. Outcomes of esophagectomy for achalasia are good when performed in experienced surgical centers.

Indocyanine green enhanced near-infrared fluorescence imaging for perfusion assessment of colonic conduit for esophageal replacement: Utility of a novel technique

Esophagectomy, followed by esophageal replacement using gastric/colonic conduits, is a complex surgical procedure with significant perioperative morbidity. The most significant and potentially life-threatening complication associated with esophageal replacement is conduit ischaemia, resulting in anastomotic leak and conduit necrosis. Ensuring adequate perfusion of the conduit remains the key to preventing conduit ischaemia. Indocyanine green (ICG) enhanced near-infrared fluorescence imaging is a novel technique which has been used for assessing bowel perfusion. While numerous studies have focused on ICG fluorescence imaging for assessment of gastric conduit perfusion after esophagectomy, data regarding its use for colonic conduits is limited to case reports. ICG fluorescence imaging can help in resolving intraoperative issues by predicting the adequacy of colonic conduit perfusion, thereby preventing postoperative morbidity. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report in Indian literature describing the utility of ICG fluorescence imaging for assessment of perfusion of colonic interposition.

Salvage Esophagectomy

Salvage esophagectomy is an option for patients with recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer after definitive chemoradiation therapy or those who undergo active surveillance after induction chemoradiation therapy. Salvage resection is associated with higher rates of morbidity compared with planned esophagectomy but offers patients with locally advanced disease a chance at improved long-term survival. Salvage resection should be preferentially performed in a multidisciplinary setting by high-volume and experienced surgeons. Technical considerations, such as prior radiation dosage, radiation field, and choice of conduit, should be taken into account.

The Benefits of the Supercharged Ileocolic Flap in Patients Who Underwent Total Esophagectomy and Gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

 Patients who undergo total esophagectomy and gastrectomy present a challenging scenario for reconstructive surgeons. Several techniques have been described. However, the best choice is still a matter of debate. We aim to report our experience with the supercharged ileocolic flap, then to compare the long-term functional outcomes in cancer and caustic injury patients. We investigate the safest route of transposition and demonstrate the importance of supercharging the flap. Last, we perform a literature review to compare our results with the ones reported in the literature.

METHODS

 A total of 36 patients underwent the supercharged ileocolic flap procedure. The details reviewed included the type of defect, flap characteristic, route of transposition, complications, patient survival, and swallowing evaluation. Survival and long-term function preservation were considered as the main outcomes. A secondary end-point was the identification of the safest route of transposition. We extracted the pertinent literature on supercharged bowel flaps from 1995 to July 2020 RESULTS:  All flaps survived; only two flaps were partially lost. Thirty-three percent of the cohort experienced postoperative complications; the most common was leakage of the cervical anastomosis (17%), followed by neck wound infection (8%). The 5-year dysphagia-free survival rate was 87% in corrosive injury patients and 78% in cancer patients. The mean time to be free from dysphagia after surgery was 25.12 ± 4.55 months for corrosive patients and 39.56 ± 9.45 months for cancer patients (p = 0.118). The safest route of transposition was retrosternal extra-mediastinal. From the literature review, the data from 11 studies were extracted.

CONCLUSION

 The supercharged ileocolic flap is a robust option for total esophageal replacement when the stomach is not available and the retrosternal route is the safest for transposition. The functional outcomes are excellent, with acceptable morbidity and a good life expectancy, either in cancer and noncancer patients. Supercharging the flap is recommended.

Treatment protocol for secondary esophageal reconstruction using 'supercharged' colon interposition flaps

Locoregional esophageal cancer is currently treated with induction chemoradiotherapy, followed by esophagectomy with reconstruction, using a gastric conduit. In cases of conduit failure, patients are temporized with a cervical esophagostomy and enteral nutrition until gastrointestinal continuity can be established. At our institution, we favor reconstruction, using a colon interposition with a 'supercharged' accessory vascular pedicle. Consequently, we sought to examine our technique and outcomes for esophageal reconstruction, using this approach. We performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent esophagectomy at our center between 2008 and 2018. We identified those patients who had a failed gastric conduit and underwent secondary reconstruction. Patient demographics, perioperative details, and clinical outcomes were analyzed after our clinical care pathway was used to manage and prepare patients for a second major reconstructive surgery. Three hundred and eighty eight patients underwent esophagectomy and reconstruction with a gastric conduit. Seven patients (1.8%) suffered gastric conduit loss and underwent a secondary reconstruction using a colon interposition with a 'supercharged' vascular pedicle. Mean age was 70.1 (±7.3) years, and six patients were male. The transverse colon was used in four cases (57.1%), left colon in two cases (28.6%), and right colon in one case (14.3%). There were no deaths or loss of the colon interposition at follow-up. Three patients (42.9%) developed an anastomotic leak, which resolved with conservative management. All patients had resumption of oral intake within 30 days. Utilizing a 'supercharging' technique for colon interposition may improve the perfusion to the organ and may decrease morbidity. Secondary reconstruction should occur when the patient's oncologic, physiologic, and psychosocial condition is optimized. Our outcomes and preoperative strategies may provide guidance for those centers treating this complicated patient population.

How to ensure immediate and long-term good blood supply by the careful dissection of the marginal artery and supercharge with neck vessels in esophageal reconstruction with the colon segment interposition: 35 years of experience

BACKGROUND

Colon interposition for total esophageal replacement cases represents one of the most challenging procedures in surgery. A retrospective study has been conducted and suggestions are proposed according to the analysis of 268 patients who underwent colon interposition for esophageal replacement. Complication rates and the duration of hospital stay were retrospectively analyzed.

METHODS

A total of 268 patients were operated between 1984 and 2018. In group 1, 164 patients underwent colon interposition without supercharging with neck vessels and in group 2, 104 patients underwent colon interposition with supercharging. Data regarding flap loss, anastomotic leakage, the duration of hospital stay, and stricture formation in the long-term were statistically analyzed and compared between two groups.

RESULTS

The success rate of reconstruction was 98,1% (161 of 164 patients) and 99% (103 of 104 patients) for group 1 and 2, respectively. Early complication (anastomotic leakage) rate was 4,9% in group 1 and 1% in group 2. The differences between two groups regarding flap loss and anastomotic leakage rates were not statistically significant (p = 0,495 and p = 0,077, respectively). The hospital stay was 26,3 days for patients without supercharging (group1) and 20,5 days for patients with supercharging (group 2). In group 1, 6,7% (11/164) of patients had narrowing at the junction of the pharynx and colon; however, in group 2, proximal anastomotic stricture formation was observed in only 1% (1/104) of the patients. The stricture rate was significantly lower in group 2 when compared to group 1 (p = 0,021).

CONCLUSION

The careful dissection of the marginal artery and supercharging with neck vessels provide lower complication rates in colon interposition for esophageal reconstruction.

Robotic Thoracic Surgery

Minimally invasive surgery for diseases of the chest offsets the morbidity of painful thoracic incisions while allowing for meticulous dissection of major anatomic structures. This benefit translates to improved outcomes and recovery following the surgical management of benign and malignant esophageal pathologic condition, mediastinal tumors, and lung resections. This anatomic region is particularly amenable to a robotic approach given the fixed space and need for complex intracorporeal dissection. As robotic platforms continue to evolve, more complex thoracic surgical interventions will be facilitated, translating to improved outcomes for our patients.

Thoracoscopic total esophagogastrectomy with supercharged colon interposition for the treatment of esophageal adenocarcinoma in situs inversus

Background: Esophagectomy in situs inversus is challenging. With long-segment supercharged reconstruction, it becomes more perplexing and multidisciplinary surgical skills are needed. Challenges met and the surgical technique used is presented in this case report. Methods: The case of a 49-year old patient with situs inversus abdominus and a locally advanced distal esophageal adenocarcinoma extending to the stomach is presented. Results: Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and due to inability to use the stomach as a conduit, a thoracoscopic total esophagogastrectomy with long-segment reconstruction was performed. The conduit used was the left colon and was supercharged with venous and arterial anastomoses in the neck. Conduit perfusion, as assessed by the Spy system revealed marked improvement post supercharging. No anastomotic leak was noted and oral diet was started on day 4. On day 26 the patient developed pneumonia necessitating intubation that was declined. Organ support was withheld with patient death at day 29. Conclusion: In long-segment esophageal reconstruction with supercharged colon, although thoracoscopy is feasible, laparoscopy is found unsafe. Careful preoperative planning and colon assessment via computed tomography(CT) colonography/angiography and a multidisciplinary team approach is recommended. Adjuncts to assess conduit perfusion like the Spy system are helpful. Supercharging the long colonic conduit is a way of minimizing ischemia-related complications.

Microsurgical options after the failure of left colon interposition graft in esophagogastric reconstruction

Colon interposition is commonly used for esophageal reconstruction in patients with a previous gastrectomy. However, when colon interposition fails and alternative reconstruction is required, there are few options for reconstructing the long segment from the esophagus to the stomach. Here, we report on cases of esophagogastric reconstruction with limited alternative options after the failure of transverse and left colon interposition. In these cases, reconstruction was performed using two different microvascular methods: double-pedicle jejunal free flap and supercharged ileocolic interposition graft.

Conduit necrosis following esophagectomy: An up-to-date literature review

Esophageal conduit ischaemia and necrosis is an uncommon but devastating complication of esophagectomy and remains one of the most challenging issues in surgical practice. The incidence, time interval to develop symptoms, and clinical presentation are highly variable with no predictable pattern. Evidence comes from case reports and case series rather than randomized controlled trials. We describe the issues surrounding conduit necrosis affecting the stomach, jejunum and colon as an esophageal replacement and the advantages, disadvantages and challenges of each type of reconstruction. Diagnosis is challenging for the most experienced surgeon. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and computed tomography thorax with both oral and intravenous contrast is the gold standard. Management, either conservative or interventional is also a difficult decision. Management options include conservative treatment and more aggressive treatments such as stent insertion, surgical debridement and repair of the esophagus using jejunum, colon or a musculocutaneous flap. In spite of recent advances in surgical techniques, there is no reliable strategy to manage esophageal conduit necrosis. Our review covers the pathophysiology and clinical significance of esophageal necrosis while highlighting current techniques of prevention, diagnosis and treatment of this life-threatening condition.

Infrared intraoperative fluorescence imaging using indocyanine green in thoracic surgery

Thoracic surgery faces many unique challenges that require innovative solutions. The increase in utilization of minimally invasive practices, poor overall cancer survival and significant morbidity of key operations remain key obstacles to overcome. Intraoperative fluorescence imaging is a process by which fluorescent dyes and imaging systems are used as adjuncts for surgeons in the operating room. Other surgical subspecialists have shown that intraoperative fluorescence imaging can be applied as a practical adjunct to their practices. Thoracic surgeons over the last 15 years have also used intraoperative fluorescence imaging for sentinel lymph node mapping, lung mapping, oesophageal conduit vascular perfusion and lung nodule identification. This review describes some of the key studies that demonstrate the applications of intraoperative near-infrared fluorescence imaging.

PHARYNGO-ILEO-COLO-ANASTOMOSIS WITH MICRO-VASCULAR BLOOD SUPPLY AUGMENTATION FOR ESOPHAGO-GASTRIC REPLACEMENT DUE TO ESOPHAGO-GASTRIC NECROSIS AFTER CAUSTIC INGESTION

BACKGROUND

Complete esophago-gastric necrosis after caustic ingestion is a challenging surgical scenario for reconstruction of the upper digestive transit.

AIM

To present a surgical technique for reconstruction of the upper digestive tract after total esophagectomy and gastrectomy due to esophageal and gastric necrosis.

METHOD

The transit was re-established by means of a pharyngo-ileo-colic interposition with microsurgical arterial and venous anastomosis for augmentation of blood supply. Colo-duodeno-anastomosis and ileo-transverse colic anastomosis were performed for complete digestive transit reconstruction.

RESULT

This procedure was applied in a case of 41 years male attempted suicide by ingesting alkali caustic liquid (concentrated sodium hydroxide). Total necrosis of the esophagus and stomach occurred, which required initially total esophago-gastrectomy, closure at the level of the crico-pharyngeal sphincter and jejunostomy for enteral feeding with a highly deteriorated quality of life . The procedure was performed later and there were no major early and late postoperative complications and normal nutritional conditions were re-stablished.

CONCLUSION

The procedure is feasible and must be managed by multidisciplinary team in order to re-establish a normal quality of life.

Colon Interposition for Esophageal Reconstruction in Cancer Patients

Objective:

The aim of this study was to report our experience with colon interposition (COI) and to compare the results with an extensive review of the COI literature.

Summary of Background Data:

The stomach is the first choice as an esophageal substitute following esophagectomy in cancer patients, while COI is reserved for patients where the stomach is not available or must be included in the resection due to cancer.

Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed the records of cancer patients undergoing colon interposition from 2006 to 2017. Outcomes were compared with an extensive review of the literature published between 2000 and 2017.

Results:

A total of 13 patients underwent planned COI. Mortality was zero and overall morbidity was 53%; 4 patients suffered from leakage and 2 patients from strictures. None of the patients suffered from necrosis of the interponat and there was no need for subsequent redundancy operations.

The extensive review identified 23 publications. Overall study grading was low (grade C). Only 3 studies were prospective, no randomized studies were found, and many outcomes were poorly defined. The rates for 30-day and in-hospital mortality were 1% and 2%, respectively. Overall morbidity was 43%. The reported number of leakages, strictures, necrosis of the interponat, and redundancy operations varied between 0% and 50%, 0% and 21%, 0% and 9%, and 0% and 2%, respectively.

Conclusions:

COI is a complex technique that is necessary in a relatively small group of selected patients after esophagectomy for cancer. Prospective and comparative studies with strict outcome definitions, long-term follow up, and patient reported outcome measures are lacking.

Peculiarities of intra-thoracic colon interposition-eso-coloplasty: indications, surgical management and outcomes

Stomach is the usual organ of choice for oesophageal replacement. Gastric pull-up is a standardized, fast and secure procedure, requiring only one anastomosis and usually performed with mini-invasive techniques. Colon is used when the stomach is not available, for tumours of the upper oesophagus or the hypopharynx, for benign or paediatric diseases. It is a complex surgery requiring a specific pre-operative management, three or four anastomoses, and a careful choice of the route of reconstruction. Early post-operative complications, such as anastomotic leakage, are frequent. Long-term outcomes are marked by strictures of the anastomosis and redundancy, but the reported quality of life of the patients is good. Eso-coloplasty remains a safe and feasible alternative to gastric pull-up for oesophageal replacement, for specific indications.

Alternative conduits for esophageal replacement

Replacement of the native esophagus after esophagectomy is a problem that has challenged surgeons for over a century. Not only must the conduit be long enough to bridge the distance between the cervical esophagus and the abdomen, it must also have a reliable vascular supply and be sufficiently functional to allow for deglutition. The stomach, jejunum, and colon (right, left or transverse) have all been proposed as potential solutions. The stomach has gained favor for its length, reliable vascular supply and need for only a single anastomosis. However, there are times when the stomach is unavailable for use as a conduit. It is in these instances that an esophageal surgeon must have an alternative conduit in their armamentarium. In this paper, we will briefly discuss the technical aspects of jejunal and colonic interposition. We will review the recent literature with a focus on early and late outcomes. The advantages and disadvantages of both options will be reviewed.

Reconstruction after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer patients with a history of gastrectomy

Pedicled jejunal flap and colon graft interposition are choices for esophageal reconstruction in patients with a history of gastrectomy or those who have undergone synchronous esophagogastrectomy. However, the optimal conduit in this situation is still being debated. We reviewed the literature concerning esophageal reconstruction using a conduit other than the stomach. Approximately 10 % of esophagectomized patients undergo esophageal reconstruction using pedicled jejunum or colon interposition in Japan. The jejunal graft and colon graft are selected evenly, although the percentage of jejunal graft use is gradually increasing. Microvascular supercharge was performed in most of the reports of pedicled jejunal graft reconstruction, whereas vascular enhancement was not popularly used in the reports of colon graft interposition. Although the incidences of graft loss and anastomotic leakage were comparable between grafts, mortality rates seem to be higher in patients who undergo colon graft reconstruction than in those who undergo reconstruction with a jejunal graft. Prospective comparisons of short-term outcomes as well as long-term quality of life are needed to identify the best method of reconstruction.

Complex Esophageal Reconstruction Procedures Have Acceptable Outcomes Compared With Routine Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Complex esophageal reconstruction (CER) is defined as restoring esophageal continuity in a previously operated field, using a nongastric conduit, or after esophageal diversion. This study compares the outcomes of CER with non-CER (NCER), which uses an undisturbed stomach for reconstruction.

METHODS

This single-institution retrospective cohort study compares 75 CERs with 75 NCERs from 1995 to 2014 that were matched for cancer versus benign disease. Distributions of demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and complications were compared between CER and NCER. Odds of mortality at 30 and 90 days were calculated with logistic regression. Overall survival was illustrated with Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Although patients were similar in age, sex, and preoperative comorbidities, more non-white patients underwent CER (p = 0.04). Most NCER patients had adenocarcinoma (44%) or Barrett's high-grade dysplasia (39%); most CER patients had other benign disease (44%) or squamous cell carcinoma (24%, p < 0.01). CER had statistically significantly higher rates of reoperation, pneumonia, infection, and gastrointestinal complications, and longer median length of stay than NCER. Odds of mortality for CER and NCER at 30 days (odds ratio [OR] 1.0, 95% CI: 0.1 to 16.3), 90 days (OR 2.6, 95% CI: 0.5 to 13.9) and overall (adjusted hazard ratio 1.56, 95% CI: 0.9 to 2.7) were not statistically significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with NCER, CER patients had higher rates of return to the operating room, more postoperative infections and gastrointestinal complications, and longer length of stay. However, 30-day, 90-day, and overall survival were similar. CER should be offered to patients with acceptable risks and anticipated long-term survival.

European perspective in Thoracic surgery-eso-coloplasty: when and how?

Colon interposition has been used since the beginning of the 20(th) century as a substitute for esophageal replacement. Colon interposition is mainly chosen as a second line treatment when the stomach cannot be used, when the stomach has to be resected for oncological or technical reasons, or when the stomach is deliberately kept intact for benign diseases in young patients with long-life expectancy. During the surgery the vascularization of the colon must be carefully assessed, as well as the type of the graft (right or left colon), the length of the graft, the surgical approach and the route of the reconstruction. Early complications such as graft necrosis or anastomotic leaks, and late complications such as redundancy depend on the quality of the initial surgery. Despite a complex and time-consuming procedure requiring at least three or four digestive anastomoses, reported long term functional outcomes of colon interposition are good, with an acceptable operative risk. Thus, in very selected indications, colon interposition could be seen as a valuable alternative for esophageal replacement when stomach cannot be considered. This review aims at briefly defining "when" and "how" to perform a coloplasty through demonstrative videos.

Ileo-right hemi-colonic cervical pull-up on a non-supercharged ileocolic arterial pedicle: A technical and case report

Esophageal reconstruction can be challenging when stomach and colon are not anatomically intact and their use as esophageal substitutes is therefore limited. Innovative individual approaches are then necessary to restore the intestinal passage. We describe a technique in which a short stump of the right hemicolon and 25 cm of ileum on a long, non-supercharged, fully mobilized ileocolic arterial pedicle were used for esophageal reconstruction to the neck. In this case, a 65 year-old male patient had accidentally indigested hydrochloric acid which caused necrosis of his upper digestive tract. An emergency esophagectomy, gastrectomy, duodenectomy, pancreatectomy and splenectomy had been performed in an outside hospital. A cervical esophagostomy and a biliodigestive anastomosis had been created and a jejunal catheter for enteral feeding had been placed. After the patient had recovered, a reconstruction of his food passage via the left and transverse colon failed for technical reasons due to an intraoperative necrotic demarcation of the colon. Our team then faced the situation that only a short stump of the right hemi-colon was left in situ when the patient was referred to our center. After intensified nutritional therapy, we reconstructed this patient’s food passage with the right hemicolon-approach described herein. After treatment of a postoperative pneumonia, the patient was discharged from hospital on the 26^th postoperative day in a good clinical condition on an oral-only diet. In conclusion, individual approaches for long-segment reconstruction of the esophagus can be technically feasible in experienced hands. They do not always require arterial supercharging or free intestinal transplantation.

Management of Conduit Necrosis Following Esophagectomy

The management of conduit necrosis during or after esophagectomy requires the assembly of a multidisciplinary team to manage nutrition, sepsis, intravenous access, reconstruction, and recovery. Reconstruction is most often performed as a staged procedure. The initial surgery is likely to involve esophageal diversion onto the chest where possible, making an effort to preserve esophageal length. Optimization of patients before reconstruction enhances outcomes following reconstruction with either jejunum or colon after gastric conduit failure. Maintaining enteral access for feeding at all times is imperative. Management of patients should be performed at high-volume esophageal centers performing regular reconstructions.

Anastomotic Leakage Following Esophagectomy

Anastomotic leaks remain a significant clinical challenge following esophagectomy with foregut reconstruction. Despite an increasing understanding of the multiple contributing factors, advancements in perioperative optimization of modifiable risks, and improvements in surgical, endoscopic, and percutaneous management techniques, leaks remain a source of major morbidity associated with esophageal resection. The surgeon should be well versed in the principles underlying the cause of leaks, and strategies to minimize their occurrence. Appropriately diagnosed and managed, most anastomotic leaks following esophagectomy can be brought to a successful resolution.

Outcomes after transhiatal esophagectomies in an eastern-European low-volume center

BACKGROUND

The present study proposes to analyze the results obtained after transhiatal esophagectomies (THE), from the perspective of an Eastern European surgical center with low esophageal resection volume (LV).

AIMS

Our analysis, which to the authors' knowledge is the first of its kind in Romania, has the purpose of comparing our results with those obtained in higher or similar volume centers, in order to derive conclusions regarding the quality of therapeutic management for patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer in Romania.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

METHODS

In total, 70 patients were included, in whom THE was performed during the period 1997-2013 by six senior surgeons. The majority of our patients had esophageal cancers (n=66; 94.3%); we also performed 4 THE procedures for benign conditions (n=3; 4.27%) and esophageal perforation (n=1; 1.42%).

RESULTS

The majority of cancer-group patients had T3/N+ tumors. The nodal involvement in the T2, T3 and T4 categories was 9.9%, 21.6% and 35.1%, respectively. Complications were identified in 45 patients (68.2%), with the majority being represented by pulmonary complications (16 patients; 24.3%) and cervical leaks (15 cases; 22.7%). In-hospital mortality was 9.09%. We found a one-year overall survival rate of 58.7% (95%CI: 51.7-65.7%), 27.2% at 2 years (95%CI: 21.2-36.2%) and 10.5% at 3 years (95%CI: 6.5-14.5%). The median survival rate was estimated to be 16 months.

CONCLUSION

Morbidity and in-hospital mortality after THE was performed in low-volume centers, despite being significantly higher than reported in HV centers, could be kept at reasonable rates. In our opinion, the measures which have the potential to raise the standard of care for patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer in Romania are represented by the standardization of therapeutic and diagnostic protocols for esophageal cancer and the centralization of these major oncologic interventions in surgical excellence centers.

Distribution of lymph node metastasis and clinical validity of gastric tube reconstruction in lower thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma with gastric invasion

BACKGROUND

The distribution of lymph node (LN) metastases of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) with gastric invasion remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to clarify the relationship between gastric invasion and abdominal LN metastasis in patients with esophageal SCC. Furthermore, the clinical validity of gastric tube reconstruction for those with gastric invasion was investigated.

METHODS

Patients who underwent subtotal esophagectomy at our institution were reviewed. Gastric invasion was evaluated with pretreatment upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and classified into 3 groups: no invasion, Gr 0; slight invasion (0-19 mm), Gr 1; and massive invasion (20 mm or longer), Gr 2. The correlations between gastric invasion, the number of abdominal LN metastases, and postoperative recurrence were investigated.

RESULTS

Of 79 patients, the distribution of pretreatment gastric invasion was Gr 0, 1, and 2 in 57, 15, and 7 patients, respectively. All patients underwent subtotal esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction. There was no significant difference in the number of abdominal LN metastases among groups. In survival analysis, the location of the distal end of the tumor was not a predictive factor for postoperative recurrence. Regarding patterns of recurrence, in patients with gastric invasion, there was no remarkable increase in the frequency of recurrence in the abdominal LNs or the regional LNs around the gastric tube.

CONCLUSIONS

Pretreatment gastric invasion did not significantly influence abdominal LN metastasis and postoperative recurrence. In patients with esophageal SCC at the lower thoracic esophagus with gastric invasion, subtotal esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction might be a valid surgical procedure.

Jejunal graft conduits after esophagectomy

INTRODUCTION

The jejunum is uniquely suitable for esophageal reconstruction because it is relatively abundant, does not require a formal preparation, is typically free of disease, has similar luminal size compared to the esophagus, has intrinsic peristalsis, and may not undergo senescent lengthening to the extent that colon does.

METHODS

To obtain data to determine the outcomes of jejunal interposition for esophageal replacement, electronic databases were searched, including MEDLINE (Ovid SP), Scopus, EMBASE (Ovid SP), Science Direct's full-text database, and the Cochrane Library from January 1990 to September 2013.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and forty-six abstracts were reviewed and an article search was performed on selected abstracts. Additional references from article bibliographies were included as appropriate. A thorough search of the literature demonstrates the widespread use of jejunum, either as a free, pedicled, or free- and pedicled-graft with acceptable results.

CONCLUSIONS

Any region of the esophagus can be replaced by jejunum, whether it is distal esophagus as a Merendino procedure for a vagal-sparing esophagectomy and segmental jejunal reconstruction connected to stomach, mid-thoracic esophagus as a pedicled jejunal interposition or free flap, cervical esophagus as a free segmental interposition, or the entire length as a long-segment super-charged pedicled jejunal interposition. When used, the jejunum is either pedicled, augmented ("super-charged"), a free segment (requiring microvascular anastomosis of artery and vein), or a combination of the above.