Outcomes for Correction of Long-Gap Esophageal Atresia: A 22-Year Experience

Long-gap esophageal atresia: is native esophagus preservation always possible?

Introduction

Esophageal atresia (EA) is a congenital defect that causes esophageal discontinuity, often with an associated tracheo-esophageal fistula (TEF) in 70%-90% of cases. When the distance between esophageal ends precludes primary anastomosis, it results in long gap esophageal atresia (LGEA), complicating the surgical management. This study retrospectively reviewed LGEA cases from the past decade, treated with the goal of preserving the native esophagus, comparing surgical techniques and outcomes with current literature.

Materials and methods

The data of patients treated for LGEA between 2013 and 2024 were collected from medical charts, focusing on patients treated with the preservation of their native esophagus.

Results

Ten patients were enrolled for this study. All of them had a gap between the esophageal ends equal to or greater than three vertebral bodies. Four patients (40%) underwent a delayed primary anastomosis (DPA) procedure, while the remaining six (60%) underwent a traction staged repair. All patients were treated with open surgery. The follow-up period extended from 3 months to 10 years.

Conclusion

Preserving the native esophagus in patients with LGEA is a challenging but feasible goal, with delayed primary anastomosis and traction techniques playing key roles. We advocate for the preservation of the native esophagus as the preferred approach for ensuring a high quality of life for patients, as it helps to avoid severe long-term complications associated with esophageal substitution.

Isoperistaltic gastric tube for long gap esophageal atresia (LGEA) in newborn, infants, and toddlers: a case-control study from a tertiary center

Background

Limited evidence exists about outcomes after gastric tube formation as "rescue" technique to avoid esophageal replacement in long gap esophageal atresia (LGEA). The last ERNICA Consensus Conference on the Management of LGEA has placed the techniques of gastric tubulization among the priorities for future research.

Aims

Evaluate personal experience with Isoperistaltic Gastric Tube (IGT) and compare its outcomes with other more popular techniques for LGEA.

Methods

A case-control study has been conducted. A retrospective monocentric analysis of LGEA patients (period: 2010-19) has been conducted in all consecutive IGT patients and each of these has been type matched with two cases of LGEA treated with other techniques. The follow-up (FU) considered was 24-months.

Results

IGT and controls showed no statistically significant differences regarding preoperative variables like sex, gestational age, birth weight, syndromes, and EA type. However, IGT patients had a significantly longer esophageal GAP under boost pressure (4.5 vertebral bodies vs. 3.6, p = 0.019) at time of surgery. The analysis showed no statistical difference among the two groups about perioperative outcomes, ICU, or overall postoperative stay. No differences have been shown between IGT and controls during the follow-up regarding GERD, esophagitis, fundoplication, dysphagia, vocal cord paralysis, stenosis, and dilatations, auxologic data, need for anastomosis revision, oral aversion, and death.

Conclusions

Isoperistaltic Gastric Tube is safe and effective even in LGEA patients with longer gaps, with good perioperative, post-operative and middle-term outcomes. This procedure may be considered as an alternative to avoid esophageal substitution when a primary anastomosis seems impossible for a residual gap after traction and growth techniques.

Clinical outcome, quality of life, and mental health in long-gap esophageal atresia: comparison of gastric sleeve pull-up and delayed primary anastomosis

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric surgeons have yet to reach a consensus whether a gastric sleeve pull-up or delayed primary anastomosis for the treatment of esophageal atresia (EA), especially of the long-gap type (LGEA) should be performed. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcome, quality of life (QoL), and mental health of patients with EA and their parents.

METHODS

Clinical outcomes of all children treated with EA from 2007 to 2021 were collected and parents of affected children were asked to participate in questionnaires regarding their Quality of Life (QoL) and their child's Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), as well as mental health.

RESULTS

A total of 98 EA patients were included in the study. For analysis, the cohort was divided into two groups: (1) primary versus (2) secondary anastomosis, while the secondary anastomosis group was subdivided into (a) delayed primary anastomosis and (b) gastric sleeve pull-up and compared with each other. When comparing the secondary anastomosis group, significant differences were found between the delayed primary anastomosis and gastric sleeve pull-up group; the duration of anesthesia during anastomosis surgery (478.54 vs 328.82 min, p < 0.001), endoscopic dilatation rate (100% vs 69%, p = 0.03), cumulative time spent in intensive care (42.31 vs 94.75 days, p = 0.03) and the mortality rate (0% vs 31%, p = 0.03). HRQoL and mental health did not differ between any of the groups.

CONCLUSION

Delayed primary anastomosis or gastric sleeve pull-up appear to be similar in patients with long-gap esophageal atresia in many key aspects like leakage rate, strictures, re-fistula, tracheomalacia, recurrent infections, thrive or reflux. Moreover, HrQoL was comparable in patients with (a) gastric sleeve pull-up and (b) delayed primary anastomosis. Future studies should focus on the long-term results of either preservation or replacement of the esophagus in children.

Delayed primary anastomosis for repair of long-gap esophageal atresia: technique revisited

The operative management of patients born with long-gap esophageal atresia (LGEA) remains a major challenge for most pediatric surgeons, due to the rarity and complex nature of this malformation. In LGEA, the distance between the proximal and distal esophageal end is too wide, making a primary anastomosis often impossible. Still, every effort should be made to preserve the native esophagus as no other conduit can replace its function in transporting food from the oral cavity to the stomach satisfactorily. In 1981, Puri et al. observed that in newborns with LGEA spontaneous growth and hypertrophy of the two segments occur at a rate faster than overall somatic growth in the absence of any form of mechanical stretching, traction or bouginage. They further noted that maximal natural growth arises in the first 8-12 weeks of life, stimulated by the swallowing reflex and reflux of gastric contents into the lower esophageal pouch. Since then, creation of an initial gastrostomy and continuous suction of the upper esophageal pouch followed by delayed primary anastomosis at approximately 3 months of age has been widely accepted as the preferred treatment option in most LGEA cases, generally providing good functional results. The current article offers a comprehensive update on the various aspects and challenges of this technique including initial preoperative management and subsequent gap assessment, while also discussing potential postoperative complications and long-term outcome.

Esophageal substitution or esophageal elongation procedures in patients with complicated esophageal atresia? Results of a comparative study

BACKGROUND

In newborns with complex esophageal atresia, there are situations in which a primary anastomosis cannot be safely performed. The alternative is performing a late anastomosis after the esophageal ends have gone through a period of spontaneous growth or after elongations of the distant ends of the esophagus and create an anastomosis under tension which causes risks of morbidity. An alternative to the elongation procedures is to perform a cervical esophagostomy with a gastrostomy for nutritional support and later on an esophageal replacement. The purposes of this retrospective chart review study are to report on our experience with esophageal substitution procedures in such cases, address the quality of life of a group of patients, and compare our results with those of patients who underwent esophageal elongation procedures as reported in the literature.

METHODS

Patients with esophageal atresia underwent esophageal replacement procedures and quality of life was assessed in a group of esophagocoloplasty patients.

RESULTS

From February 1978 to July 2019, 276 children (232 colonic interpositions and 44 total gastric transpositions) were studied; the most frequent complication was cervical anastomosis leakage [70 (30.2%) esophagocoloplasty patients and 7 (15.9%) gastric transposition patients], which sealed spontaneously in all but 4 patients. The quality of life was considered excellent or good in approximately 90% of the studied 70 out of the 276 patients; the comparison with the esophageal elongation procedures showed that esophageal substitution procedures promoted excellent long-term results with normal deglutition function (98.2% of patients, versus 33.3%, 36.5%, and 62.5%, respectively from the elongation series, P <0.0001 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSION

Esophagocoloplasty or total gastric transposition is a good alternative to treat patients with complex esophageal atresia.

TYPE OF STUDY

Retrospective study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.