Colon interposition for esophageal replacement: current indications and long-term function

[Technique of Colon Interposition for Oesophageal Replacement for Oesophageal Cancer]

Nowadays, it is only relatively rare and in selected situations that colonic interposition is chosen rather than the stomach as a reconstructive organ for replacing the oesophagus. The colon is a reliable organ for tubular replacement of the oesophagus when the stomach is not available for reconstruction. Colon interposition is a complex and complicated operation. It requires a specific indication and thorough preoperative preparation. From a technical point of view, colon interposition places high demands on the selection and surgical dissection of the vascular supply to the reconstructed organ. The reconstruction route and elevation of the interposition graft to the proximal oesophagus and the need to create 3 or 4 gastrointestinal anastomoses also place significantly higher demands than reconstruction using a gastric tube. Overall, despite the significant surgery-related morbidity, good functional results and a good quality of life can usually be achieved. The surgical technique applied in our own practice is described in detail. An overview from literature on the results of colonic interposition is given, particularly with regard to surgical complications and quality of life after colon interposition.

Voice Outcomes Following Colon Interposition

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

This case highlights the consequences of colon interposition on phonation and swallowing. Findings in this patient included laryngopharyngeal reflux, vocal fold paralysis, poor esophageal peristalsis, failed bolus transfers, and others. The mechanical and functional differences between the colon and the esophagus can impact bolus transfer, reflux, and phonation. Further research is required to identify the mechanisms by which colon interposition can impact voice and swallowing.

[Indocyanine green in delayed esophageal reconstruction after previous extirpation]

Advanced chemo- and radiotherapy makes it possible to expand the cohort of patients who can undergo surgical treatment for esophageal cancer. Optimization of perioperative approach, diagnosis and modern options for complications reduced early postoperative mortality after esophagectomy. Conduit ischemia with failure of esophageal-gastric or esophageal-intestinal anastomosis is one of the most serious complications. To minimize the risk of anastomotic leakage and graft necrosis in these patients, various methods of intraoperative assessment of graft viability are being investigated. Near-infrared fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green is valuable for real time assessment of graft perfusion. To date, fluorescence imaging is analyzed regarding perfusion of the gastric stalk after esophagectomy. However, there are still few or no data on this method for analysis of colonic conduit perfusion. The absence of plastic material for gastrointestinal reconstruction is the most dangerous moment in case of ischemia and necrosis of colonic graft. We present our first case of delayed retrosternal esophageal repair using intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescence imaging for assessment of conduit perfusion.

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.

Esophageal Replacement by Colonic Interposition for the Surgical Management of Acute Necrotic Gastric Volvulus: A Case Report

Acute gastric volvulus, a condition where the stomach rotates around itself, is a rare clinical entity that requires prompt identification and immediate intervention to prevent life-threatening complications. Upon diagnosis, an emergent exploratory laparotomy is the procedure of choice, especially if complications, such as obstruction, ischemia, or perforation, are present. Management techniques and surgical corrections vary depending on the degree of obstruction, the consequent damage to surrounding structures, and the functional reservoir. We present a case of acute gastric volvulus with extensive esophageal and gastric necrosis requiring total gastrectomy and partial esophagectomy. We discuss the patient's operative management requiring colonic interposition with esophagocolonic anastomosis to reconnect this patient's gastrointestinal tract.

Isoperistaltic gastric tube: a versatile, length-gaining option for esophageal replacement in children and adolescents

Several substitutes, including gastric transposition, colonic interposition, reverse gastric tube (RGT), etc., have been described for esophageal replacement in children and adolescents. However, the search for the ideal esophageal substitute continues due to adverse events associated with these procedures. This report presents our technique for creating an isoperistaltic gastric tube (IGT). We believe that the IGT is a versatile option for esophageal replacement as it is never length-limiting, and additional length can be gained by making minor adjustments.

The Etiology, Diagnosis, and Management of Esophageal Perforation

BACKGROUND

Esophageal perforation is a serious and potentially life-threatening medical emergency. Given multiple etiologies and varying clinical presentations of the perforated esophagus, the diagnosis is commonly delayed, complicating expeditious and optimal intervention.

METHODS

We thoroughly reviewed the latest literature on the subject and herein describe the various treatment strategies in varying settings.

RESULTS

Treatment depends on multiple factors including the cause and location of the perforation, the time interval between the inciting event and presentation to the managing clinician, the overall medical stability of the patient, comorbidities including pre-existent esophageal pathology or prior foregut operations, and both the location and extent of extra-esophageal fluid collections. Because of these various considerations, determining the best diagnostic and therapeutic approach requires considerable clinical experience and judgment on the part of the physician. Management principles include (1) adequate fluid resuscitation; (2) expeditious administration of appropriate broad-spectrum antibiotics; (3) repair, occlusion, exclusion, diversion, or exteriorization of the perforation site; (4) drainage of extraluminal fluid collections; (5) relief of distal obstruction; and (6) nutritional support.

CONCLUSIONS

For decades, operative intervention has been the mainstay of therapy for esophageal perforation. More recently, endoscopic therapies, including stenting, clipping, suturing, or endoscopic vacuum therapy, have been introduced, expanding the clinician's therapeutic armamentarium while supplanting surgical approaches in many cases. With further experience and introduction of novel therapies, the management of esophageal perforation undoubtedly will continue to evolve.

A rare case of extrathoracic large bowel obstruction following colonic interposition

Transverse colon interposition for oesophageal replacement following oesophagectomy is a rarely seen entity; interposition of the colon exterior to the thoracic cage is rarer still. Here, we report the case of a patient presenting with a large bowel obstruction in a transverse colon interposition located subcutaneously anterior to the sternum, with the diaphragm fully intact, following chest compressions for multiple cardiac arrests. The need for specialty input was highlighted early on, and the large bowel decompressed via nasogastric tube insertion into the interpositioned colon. The patient was then transferred to the acute coronary unit for further observation and management.

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.

Ileo-right colonic reconstruction preserving all four colonic vessels after esophagectomy for cancer

When colonic graft is used as an esophageal substitute after esophagectomy, one or two feeding vessels of the colon are cut to obtain sufficient length, the graft is passed via the subcutaneous route, and microvascular anastomosis is often used to avoid fatal complications. Sixteen consecutive ileo-right colonic reconstructions via the posterior mediastinal or retrosternal route with preservation of all four colonic vessels were performed in the past eight years. We presented the surgical technique and evaluation of this surgical method. In 15 out of 16 consecutive cases, the graft could be pulled up to the neck through the posterior mediastinal or retrosternal route while preserving all four colonic vessels. Reconstruction was not possible in one patient because of ileocolic vessel injury during colonic mobilization. Anastomotic leakage occurred in three patients, but all were minor and were treated conservatively. There were no patients with graft necrosis resulting from insufficient blood supply. Ileo-right colonic reconstruction with preservation of all four colonic vessels through the posterior mediastinal or retrosternal route is a safe and feasible procedure and is considered the first choice for colonic reconstruction as an esophageal substitute.

Colonic interposition, a contemporary experience: technical aspects and outcomes

Colonic interposition is rarely used as an oesophageal replacement after resection, as the preferred use of stomach involves less anastomoses and lower risks of major complications. The functional outcome from the colonic conduit is also unpredictable. This report documents the spectrum of experience of a high-volume oesophageal centre, highlighting indications, techniques and functional outcomes. A retrospective review was undertaken of a prospective database from 2012 to 2016. Four of 252 (1.5%) cases in this time period utilised colon interposition. Two cases were for gastric conduit necrosis following oesophageal cancer resections, one for caustic ingestion with both an oesophago-bronchial fistula and gastric injury, and one for a primary oesophageal malignancy in a patient whom previously had a total gastrectomy. All patients had either a retrosternal or posterior mediastinal isoperistaltic right colon conduit placed. Two of three cancer patients are alive and disease free at 3 and 5 years, respectively. Surviving patients are weight stable and tolerating a normal diet. Both report excellent quality of life using validated assessment tools. Colonic interposition is rarely required in modern oesophageal practice, but with this technique good long-term nutritional and functional outcomes can be obtained. It is required in the armamentarium of a specialist centre, and training given its rarity may require novel approaches such as simulation and cadaveric-based training.

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.

The insidious presentation and challenging management of esophageal perforation following diagnostic and therapeutic interventions

Diagnostic and therapeutic interventions on the esophagus or adjacent organs are responsible for nearly half of all esophageal perforations. If not recognized at the time of the injury, iatrogenic esophageal perforations can present insidiously and lead to delay in diagnosis, thereby increasing morbidity and mortality. Acute clinical awareness is vital for prompt diagnosis, which is usually confirmed with contrast esophagography and contrast-enhanced computed tomography. After establishment of diagnosis, treatment should be promptly initiated and include fluid-volume resuscitation, cessation of oral intake, nasogastric tube insertion, broad-spectrum antibiotics and analgesia. Primary repair, when feasible, is the treatment of choice. Additional procedures beyond primary repair, such as relief of concomitant obstruction, may be necessary if there is underlying esophageal pathology. Drainage alone can be performed for perforations of the cervical esophagus that cannot be visualized. Esophageal T-tube placement or exclusion and diversion techniques are appropriate in clinically unstable patients and in cases where primary repair is precluded either due to preexisting esophageal disease or extensive esophageal damage. Esophagectomy should be performed in patients with malignancy, end-stage benign esophageal disease or extensive esophageal damage that precludes repair. Endoscopic techniques, including stenting, clipping or vacuum therapy, can be used in select cases. Finally, nonoperative management should be reserved for patients with contained esophageal perforations, limited extraluminal soilage and no evidence of systemic inflammation.

Quality of life of patients with a colonic interposition postoesophagectomy

OBJECTIVES

After oesophagectomy, stomach grafts are most frequently used to restore intestinal continuity. Less frequently, a colonic graft is used. There is quite a large body of literature addressing the functional outcome after gastric pull-up, but little is known about the functional results of colonic interposition (CI). The aim of this study was to assess the short-term outcomes and the long-term quality of life and function of the CI postoesophagectomy.

METHODS

Between 2002 and 2016, we retrospectively collected data on 80 patients with CI from personal health records at the Ghent University hospital. We prospectively compared the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-OG25 and Swallowing Quality of Life (SWAL-QOL) questionnaire scores to the healthy reference group and the gastric tube (GT) group.

RESULTS

The 30-day mortality rate was 5%. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 37.5% and stenosis in 20% of the patients. The median overall survival of all patients was 33.9 months (95% confidence interval 8.3-59.4). The mean general health score of the CI patients was less than the healthy reference group but comparable to the GT group (CI = 62.1 vs healthy reference group = 71.2 vs GT = 60). Fifty percent of the patients reported their health as good and 15% as very good. The mean functional results with a CI were better than with a GT. Compared to GT patients, CI patients had less dyspnoea, reflux and dysphagia, but they reported more food selection, diarrhoea and weight loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the high complication rate, the severity of the disease and the demanding operation, patients perceived themselves as being in good health and reported very good long-term functionality after CI.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

B670201630635.

Colonic Interposition After Adult Oesophagectomy: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Conduit Choice and Outcome

BACKGROUND

Colonic interposition is a second-line option after oesophagectomy when a gastric neo-oesophagus is not viable. There is no consensus on the optimum anatomical colonic conduit (right or left), or route of placement (posterior mediastinal, retrosternal or subcutaneous). The aim of this review was to determine the optimum site and route of neo-oesophageal conduit after adult oesophagectomy.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library (January 1985 to January 2017) were systematically searched for studies which reported outcomes following colonic interposition in adults. The outcome measures were overall morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven observational studies involving 1849 patients [1177 males; median age (range) 60.5 (18-84) years] undergoing colonic interposition for malignant (n = 697) and benign (n = 1152) pathology were analysed. Overall pooled morbidity of left vs. right colonic conduit was 15.7% [95% CI (11.93-19.46), p < 0.001] and 18.7% [95% CI (15.58-21.82), p < 0.001] respectively. Overall pooled mortality of left vs. right colonic conduit was 6.5% [95% CI (4.55-8.51), p < 0.001] and 10.1% [95% CI (7.35-12.82), p < 0.001] respectively. Retrosternal route placement was associated with the lowest overall pooled morbidity and mortality of 9.2% [95% CI (6.48-11.99), p < 0.001] and 4.8% [95% CI (3.74-5.89), p < 0.001] respectively.

CONCLUSION

Left colonic conduits placed retrosternally were safest.

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.

Thoracic perforations-surgical techniques

Esophageal perforation may occur spontaneously, iatrogenically or in connection with traumas. Sepsis may develop in connection with mediastinal and pleural exposure in a very short time as a consequence of disintegration of the esophagus. Esophageal perforation is an emergency accompanied with a high level of mortality and morbidity. Rate of mortality for the perforations in the thoracic region is higher than that in the cervical and abdominal regions. Delay in diagnosis and treatment is the most important factor to affect the mortality. A quick and true diagnosis of esophageal perforation is prerequisite for a successful treatment. There is no certain consensus in relation with the optimal treatment of that life-threatening condition. However, in the event that perforation is detected early in a healthy esophagus, then primary repair is recommended. When it is detected late, nonoperative conservative treatment would be appropriate. The rates of mortality for the operations following a period of 24 h after rupture formation are higher than 50%. Esophagectomy is a type of an operation that is to be considered in the event of an end stage benign esophageal disease or of a large esophageal damage that does not allow primary repair. Significant decrease has been observed in the morbidity and mortality of esophageal perforation due to the improvements in the endoscopical techniques today. Minimally invasive techniques, in which drug eluting stents come first, will become an important step for the treatment of esophageal perforations in the forthcoming years.

Gastrointestinal Bleed from a Left Ventricle to Colonic Interposition Graft Fistula following an Esophagectomy

Colonic interposition grafts are commonly used as an esophageal conduit following esophageal resection. Significant morbidity is associated with this reconstruction due to the nature of the operation. Many of the complications associated with this procedure have clear management strategies; however, there is a paucity of data when it comes to managing rare complications. In this report, we discuss the presentation, operative intervention, and postoperative care of a patient who presented with a left ventricle to esophageal colonic interposition graft fistula.

European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery expert consensus statement on the prevention and management of mediastinitis

Mediastinitis continues to be an important and life-threatening complication after median sternotomy despite advances in prevention and treatment strategies, with an incidence of 0.25-5%. It can also occur as extension of infection from adjacent structures such as the oesophagus, airways and lungs, or as descending necrotizing infection from the head and neck. In addition, there is a chronic form of 'chronic fibrosing mediastinitis' usually caused by granulomatous infections. In this expert consensus, the evidence for strategies for treatment and prevention of mediatinitis is reviewed in detail aiming at reducing the incidence and optimizing the management of this serious condition.

The cervicosternolaparotomy approach for the treatment of graft dysfunction after retrosternal esophageal reconstruction for caustic injuries

OBJECTIVE

The study purpose was to report the indications, technical aspects, and outcomes of cervicosternolaparotomy during revision surgery after esophageal reconstruction for caustic injuries.

METHODS

Patients who underwent cervicosternolaparotomy during revision surgery for graft dysfunction between 1999 and 2015 were included. Cervicosternolaparotomy was performed to mobilize and pull up the primary conduit during surgery for strictures (rescue cervicosternolaparotomy) or to allow retrosternal access for management of other graft-related complications (exposure cervicosternolaparotomy). Statistical tests were performed to identify factors associated with primary conduit preservation during rescue cervicosternolaparotomy.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients were included (28 men; median age, 43 years). Median delay between primary reconstruction and cervicosternolaparotomy was 15 months. Exposure cervicosternolaparotomy was performed in 12 patients (22%) for redundancy (n = 8), spontaneous perforation (n = 2), and caustic reingestion (n = 2). Rescue cervicosternolaparotomy was performed in 43 patients (78%) to treat supra-anastomotic (n = 11), anastomotic (n = 23), and diffuse (n = 9) stenosis. During rescue cervicosternolaparotomy, the primary conduit was preserved in 32 patients; median length gain obtained by transplant release was 8 cm. Failure to preserve the primary conduit was associated with previous surgical repair attempts (P = .003) and lack of initial concomitant pharyngeal reconstruction (P = .039). Two patients died (4%), and 35 patients (64%) experienced operative complications. Operative outcomes were similar after rescue and exposure cervicosternolaparotomy. With a median follow-up of 4.4 years, the functional success rate was 85%.

CONCLUSIONS

Cervicosternolaparotomy during revision surgery for graft dysfunction is reliable, is associated with low morbidity and mortality, and has good results.

Esophagectomy and Gastric Pull-through Procedures: Surgical Techniques, Imaging Features, and Potential Complications

Esophagectomy takes the center stage in the curative treatment of local and local-regional esophageal cancer. It is a complex procedure with a high postoperative complication rate. When interpreting imaging studies, radiologists must understand the surgical techniques used and their potential complications. The most common surgical techniques are transthoracic esophagectomies, such as the Ivor Lewis and McKeown techniques, and transhiatal esophagectomy. Variations of these techniques include different choices of conduit (ie, stomach, colon, or jejunum) to serve in lieu of the resected esophagus. Postoperative imaging and accurate interpretation is vital in the aftercare of these patients. Chest radiographs, esophagrams, and computed tomographic images play an essential role in early identification of complications. Pulmonary complications and anastomotic leaks are the leading causes of postoperative morbidity and mortality secondary to esophagectomy. Other complications include technical and functional problems and delayed complications such as anastomotic strictures and disease recurrence. An esophagographic technique is described that is performed by using hand injection of contrast material into an indwelling nasogastric tube. Familiarity with the various types of esophagectomy and an understanding of possible complications are of utmost importance for radiologists and allow them to be key participants in the treatment of patients undergoing these complicated procedures.

[Management of delayed complications after esophagectomy]

Esophagectomy and subsequent reconstruction represent major physiological insults to the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract, which as a consequence can lead to malnutrition, dysphagia and reflux. From a technical perspective, operative reconstruction involving gastric pull-up with a 2-3 cm wide tube and an anastomosis cranial to the azygos vein may minimize the symptoms. Overall, the problems tend to improve approximately 6 months after the operation. Newly occurring delayed physical functional impairments with previously known underlying malignant disease may be indicative of cancer relapse. Interventional techniques, such as stent placement or brachytherapy may be better suited for treatment of recurrent disease.

The surgical management of esophago-gastric junctional cancer

The best available surgical strategy in the treatment of resectable esophago-gastric junctional (EGJ) cancer is a controversial topic. In this review we evaluate the current literature and scientific evidence examining the surgical treatment of locally advanced EGJ cancer by comparing esophagectomy with gastrectomy, transhiatal with transthoracic esophagectomy, minimally invasive with open esophagectomy, and less extensive with more extensive lymphadenectomy. We also assess endoscopic procedures increasingly used for early EGJ cancer. The current evidence does not favor any of the techniques over the others in terms of oncological outcomes. Health-related quality of life may be better following gastrectomy compared to esophagectomy. Minimally invasive procedures might be less prone to surgical complications. Endoscopic techniques are safe and effective alternatives for early-stage EGJ cancer in the short term, but surgical treatment is the mainstay in fit patients due to the risk of lymph node metastasis. Any benefit of lymphadenectomy extending beyond local or regional nodes is uncertain. This review demonstrates the great need for well-designed clinical studies to improve the knowledge in how to optimize and standardize the surgical treatment of EGJ cancer.

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.

Non-Surgical Management of Critically Compromised Airway Due to Dilatation of Interposed Colon

We present a rare case of critically compromised airway secondary to a massively dilated sequestered colon conduit after several revision surgeries. A 71-year-old male patient had several operations after the diagnosis of gastric cancer. After initial treatment of pneumonia in the pulmonology department, he was transferred to the surgery department for feeding jejunostomy because of recurrent aspiration. However, he had respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. The chest computed tomography (CT) scan showed pneumonic consolidation at both lower lungs and massive dilatation of the substernal interposed colon compressing the trachea. The dilated interposed colon was originated from the right colon, which was sequestered after the recent esophageal reconstruction with left colon interposition resulting blind pouch at both ends. It was treated with CT-guided pigtail catheter drainage via right supraclavicular route, which was left in place for 2 weeks, and then removed. The patient remained well clinically, and was discharged home.

[Delayed coloesophagoplasty in difficult clinical situations]

AIM

To improve immediate and long-term results of delayed coloesophagoplasty in cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We presented three case reports of coloesophagoplasty in difficult clinical situations including technical impossibility of primary plasty, extraordinary anesthetic situation, transplant necrosis after primary plasty.

RESULTS

Gastrointestinal tract integrity was restored in all cases and patients returned to nutrition per os, that provided good quality of life and compensated nutritional deficiencies. Only one patient had bleeding in postoperative period that required relaparotomy. There were no postoperative complications in two other patients.

CONCLUSION

Delayed coloesophagoplasty should be performed in all patients who underwent esophagogastrectomy if progression of primary disease is absent. Graft placement and colic segment are chosen individually. However left half of colon with retrosternal location of transplant is preferable for plasty.

Surgical Management of Benign Coloesophageal Stricture: a Novel Technique

Benign coloesophageal anastomotic stricture in postoperative colon bypass patients suffering from the corrosive stricture of the upper esophagus is a challenging problem. Failure of repeated endoscopic balloon dilatation makes way for revisional operative techniques like free jejunal grafts or interposition skin tube based on radial vessels. The situation arising from the morbidity of such reconstructive procedures, at times, becomes more complex than the stricture itself [1]. This clinical scenario has compelled us to innovate with a much simpler technique using buccal mucosal graft (BMG) to manage these strictures. Currently, the utility of BMG is mostly limited to urethral reconstruction. Overtime, it has become an ideal urethral substitute. Here, we present a case series of five patients who have been subjected to coloesophagoplasty with BMG and have demonstrated excellent results. With a median follow-up of 13 months, all patients have fully recovered and are taking solid and liquid foods satisfactorily. Thus, the option of coloesophagoplasty with BMG should always be kept in consideration while planning a revision surgery for a small-segment benign coloesophageal anastomotic stricture in the corrosive injury of the esophagus, considering the ease and excellent outcome.

Successful Primary Repair of a Colopericardial Fistula: A Late Complication of Esophageal Replacement

Colopericardial fistula after colonic interposition is a rare complication, with few prior reported cases. Management of such cases has usually consisted of resection of the colonic segment with cervical diversion. Here we present a case of successful primary repair of a colopericardial fistula in a 73-year-old woman who had initially undergone a colonic interposition graft 30 years before presentation.

Posterior Cologastric Anastomosis: An Effective Antireflux Mechanism in Colonic Replacement of the Esophagus

BACKGROUND

The colon may be used to replace a portion of the esophagus in pediatric patients, but prevention of gastrocolic reflux is a concern. We report our experience with the retrosternal colon bypass, and the effect of combining the procedure with a posterior cologastric anastomosis on prevention of gastrocolic reflux.

METHODS

The study included 35 consecutive pediatric patients who underwent retrosternal colon bypass during the period of 2010 through 2014. In standard practice, the cologastric anastomosis is performed at the anterior gastric wall. Lately, we modified our technique by shifting the cologastric anastomosis to the back of the stomach away from the anterior adhesions around the gastrostomy. In follow-up, a gastrogram was performed to check for gastrocolic reflux.

RESULTS

The indication for esophageal replacement was postcorrosive esophageal stricture in 19 patients and long gap esophageal atresia in 16 patients. Their mean ages were 51 and 16 months, respectively. No gastrocolic reflux was detected with the posterior cologastric anastomosis, whereas reflux was always present with the anterior cologastric anastomosis. We had two mortalities and one major morbidity (hematemesis and failure to thrive) that were related to regurgitation of gastric contents into the colonic conduit. The last patient was successfully managed by transferring the cologastric anastomosis from the front to the back of the stomach, with marked symptomatic and radiologic improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

After colonic replacement of the esophagus, the gastrocolic reflux represents a functional problem that may lead to serious complications. Combining a posterior cologastric anastomosis with retrosternal colon bypass is an effective way to avoid this problem.

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.

Long-term quality of life and alimentary satisfaction after esophagectomy with colon interposition

BACKGROUND

The long-term outcome after colon interposition for esophageal reconstruction is not well documented. Our objective was to assess quality of life and alimentary satisfaction 10 or more years after colon interposition.

METHODS

Patients who had an esophagectomy that was reconstructed using a colon interposition before April 2003 were identified. Symptoms, alimentary satisfaction, and quality of life were assessed by telephone interview and questionnaires.

RESULTS

We identified 79 surviving patients, and follow-up was obtained in 63 (80%). The indication for esophagectomy was cancer in 45 patients and benign disease in 18. Vagal-sparing esophagectomy was performed in 48% of patients, en bloc in 44%, and transhiatal in 8%. Median follow-up was 13 years (range, 10 to 38 years). The median Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index score was 3 of 4 and results from the RAND 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (RAND Corp, Santa Monica, CA) were at or above the published normal means in all categories. Most patients were free of dysphagia (89%), regurgitation (84%), and heartburn (84%). The most common postprandial symptom was early satiety (40%). The body mass index was within normal reference ranges in 90% of patients. Follow-up esophagogastroduodenoscopy in 30 patients at a median of 6 years showed no Barrett's metaplasia in the residual esophagus. Seven patients had a reoperation for colon redundancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term alimentary satisfaction and quality of life were excellent after colon interposition. Most patients were free of dysphagia and few needed revision for redundancy. These results should encourage the use of a colon interposition in patients expected to survive long-term after esophagectomy.

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.

Colon interposition for oesophageal replacement

The choice of the colon as an oesophageal substitute results primarily from the unavailability of the stomach. However, given its durability and function, colon interposition keeps elective indications in patients with benign or malignant oesophageal disease who are potential candidates for long survival. The choice of the colonic portion used for oesophageal reconstruction depends on the required length of the graft, and the encountered colonic vascular anatomy, the last being characterised by the near-invariability of the left colonic vessels, in contrast to the vascular pattern of the right side of the colon. Accordingly, the transverse colon with all or part of the ascending colon is the substitute of choice, positioned in the isoperistaltic direction, and supplied either from the left colic vessels for long grafts or middle colic vessels for shorter grafts. Technical key points are: full mobilisation of the entire colon, identification of the main colonic vessels and collaterals, and a prolonged clamping test to ensure the permeability of the chosen nourishing pedicle. Transposition through the posterior mediastinum in the oesophageal bed is the shortest one and thereby offers the best functional results. When the oesophageal bed is not available, the retrosternal route is the preferred alternative option. The food bolus travelling mainly by gravity makes straightness of the conduit of paramount importance. The proximal anastomosis is a single-layer hand-fashioned end-to-end anastomosis to prevent narrowing. When the stomach is available, the distal anastomosis is best performed at the posterior part of the antrum for the reasons of pedicle positioning and reflux prevention, and a gastric drainage procedure is added when the oesophagus and vagus nerves have been removed. In the other cases, a Roux-en-Y jejunal loop is preferable to prevent bile reflux into the colon. Additional procedures include re-establishment of the colonic continuity, a careful closure of the mesentery to avoid a further internal hernia, and routine appendectomy. When applying these technical aids, the chances of achieving a viable and well-functioning colon graft are excellent.

Isoperistaltic left colic graft interposition via a retrosternal approach for esophageal reconstruction in patients with a caustic stricture: mortality, morbidity, and functional results

PURPOSE

To report our results of treating esophageal caustic stricture with an isoperistaltic left colic graft interposed via a retrosternal route.

METHODS

We reviewed 70 patients who underwent substernal left colon interposition, performed retrosternally, for an esophageal caustic stricture, between January, 1999 and December, 2011.

RESULTS

The median operative time in this series was 3 h. A pharyngoplasty was performed in 10 patients (14.28 %), the thoracic inlet was found to be enlarged in 33 patients (47.1 %), and posterior cologastric anastomosis was performed in 58 patients (82.8 %). Two patients (2.8 %) died. Minor and major postoperative complications developed in 28 patients (40 %), including graft ischemia in 2 (2.8 %) and cervical anastomotic leakage in 14 (20 %). Five patients (7.14 %) developed a cervical anastomotic stricture. The functional results were satisfactory.

CONCLUSION

Retrosternal isoperistaltic left colic transplant interposition is an excellent long-term replacement for an esophageal caustic stricture. If performed by experienced surgeons, this procedure is effective for esophageal reconstruction.

Morphological and functional changes in colon after coloplasty for management of corrosive esophageal strictures

BACKGROUND

The etiology of corrosive esophageal strictures is different from that reported in Western literature, with acid ingestion being a major cause. This study evaluated functional and morphological changes in the colon used as neoesophagus.

METHODS

Functional changes in the neoesophagus were evaluated by symptom score of dysphagia and manometry. Barium study and fluoroscopy were done to evaluate the flow patterns and endoscopy with histopathological examination to study the adaptive changes in the colon.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients with corrosive injury presented between 2007 and 2010. Isolated esophageal involvement was seen in 22 patients; 11 of them underwent colonic replacement. The passage of barium was smooth, without any hold up at the upper or lower anastomotic line. Endoscopic biopsy at 6 months and 1 year did not show any change in the mucosal pattern or in the muscularis layer of the transposed colon. Functional evaluation showed relief of dysphagia in all 11 patients after surgery. The mean preoperative dysphagia score was 7.81 (range 5-10), at 1 month was 0.73 (range 0-2), and at 3 months post-surgery was 0.45 (range 0-2). Manometric study at 3 months after the surgery in all 11 patients and in five patients at the end of 6 months showed no evidence of peristalsis in the neoesophagus. Three of the latter five patients demonstrated a 4-5-cm zone with a high pressure in the intraabdominal part of the transposed colon compared with that in the intrathoracic part of the colon. On barium studies, reflux from the stomach into the neoesophagus was not seen in any of the 11 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Esophagocoloplasty was associated with symptom relief, and the reflux of gastric content was low because of 4-5 cm of the colon being intraabdominal in a positive pressure environment.

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

BACKGROUND

When the stomach is not available, long-segment esophageal reconstruction remains a surgical challenge. Since 2005, we have used a "supercharged" isoperistaltic colon interposition conduit for long-segment esophageal reconstruction that reestablishes a dual blood supply.

METHODS

An institutional database search of 449 patients who underwent esophagectomy from 2005 to 2012 identified 11 consecutive patients who underwent long-segment esophageal reconstruction using an isoperistaltic supercharged right (n=9) or left (n=2) colon conduit. All conduits were routed through the anterior mediastinum, maintaining the middle colic (right) or ascending left colic vessels (left) in situ, with reimplantation of the ileocolic vessels (right) or middle colic vessels (left) into the left internal thoracic artery and brachiocephalic vein to improve distal conduit blood flow.

RESULTS

Patients were a mean age of 64 years (range, 47 to 76 years). Seven patients had a history of malignancy and 4 had a benign process. The stomach was unavailable for reconstruction due to prior gastric operations (n=9) or neoplastic involvement (n=2). All reimplanted vessels demonstrated excellent flow by Doppler evaluation. Esophagocolonic healing was successful in all patients; however, 1 patient required a temporary stent.

CONCLUSIONS

Supercharged isoperistaltic colon interposition appears to be an excellent option for the challenging situation where long-segment esophageal reconstruction is needed and the stomach is not available. The additional effort required to reestablish a dual blood supply appears justified to minimize ischemic-related morbidity. Unlike long-segment small bowel "supercharged" techniques, adequate blood supply to the distal conduit may still be present in case thrombosis of the reimplanted vessels occurs.

Surgery for caustic injuries of the upper gastrointestinal tract

BACKGROUND

Surgery is the criterion standard for the treatment of severe burns and of late sequels after ingestion of corrosive agents, but long-term outcome is unknown.

METHODS

Patients who underwent surgery between 1987 and 2006, for the treatment of severe caustic burns (group I, n = 268) or of late sequels (group II, n = 79) were included in the study. Survival and functional outcomes were analyzed. Functional success was defined as nutritional autonomy after removal of the jejunostomy and tracheotomy tubes. To compare the observed mortality with the expected mortality in the general population, a standardized mortality ratio (SMR) was used.

RESULTS

Overall Kaplan-Meyer survival at 1, 5, 10, and 20 years of patients in group I was 76.4%, 63.6%, 53.9%, and 44.1%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, advanced age (P = 0.0021), extended resection (P = 0.0009), emergency esophagectomy (P = 0.013), and tracheobronchial injuries (P = 0.0011) were independent negative predictors of survival. The SMR of patients in group I was increased to 21.5 when compared to the general French population. Functional success was recorded in 147 (56%) patients in group I. Advanced age (P = 0.012), extended resection (P = 0.012), and emergency tracheotomy (P = 0.02) were independent predictors for failure. After esophageal reconstruction, patients in group II fared better than patients in group I in terms of survival (P = 0.0006) and functional success (P < 0.0001). Still, the SMR of patients in group II increased to 3.67.

CONCLUSIONS

The need to perform surgery for caustic injuries has a persistent long-term negative impact on survival and functional outcome.

Esophageal replacement by colon interposition with microvascular surgery for patients with thoracic esophageal cancer: the utility of superdrainage

Replacing the thoracic esophagus with the colon is one mode of reconstruction after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. There is, however, a high incidence of postoperative necrosis of the transposed colon. This study evaluated the outcomes of colon interposition with the routine use of superdrainage by microvascular surgery. Twenty-one patients underwent colon interposition from 2004 to 2009. The strategy for colon interposition was to: (i) use the right hemicolon; (ii) reconstruct via the subcutaneous route; (iii) perform a microvascular venous anastomosis for all patients; and (iv) perform a microvascular arterial anastomosis when the arterial blood flow was insufficient. The clinicopathologic features, surgical findings, and outcomes were investigated. The colon was used because of a previous gastrectomy in 18 patients (85.7%) and synchronous gastric cancer in three patients (14.3%). Eight patients (38.1%) underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy including three (14.3%) treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy. Seven patients (33.3%) underwent microvascular arterial anastomosis to supplement the right colon blood supply. Pneumonia occurred in four patients (19.0%). Anastomotic leakage was observed in five patients (23.8%); however, no colon necrosis was observed. The 3-year and 5-year overall survival rates were both 50.6%. Colon interposition with superdrainage results in successful treatment outcomes. This technique is one option for colon interposition employing the right hemicolon.

Supercharged pedicled jejunal interposition for esophageal replacement: a 10-year experience

BACKGROUND

Esophageal continuity after esophagectomy can be established without a viable stomach conduit by using the colon or jejunum. The current study evaluated the technical outcomes of the long-segment supercharged jejunal (SPJ) interposition.

METHODS

A database was developed to capture patient characteristics, operative technique, and outcomes for patients with an SPJ interposition at 2 institutions from 2000 to 2010. A multivariable analysis was performed to determine predictors of leak and graft loss. A selective prospective manometric analysis was performed to describe peristalsis of the SPJ.

RESULTS

Of the 60 patients undergoing SPJ reconstruction, 44 (73%) were men, and the median age was 57 years (range, 28 to 76 years). The operation in 23 patients (38%) was performed to reverse esophageal discontinuity, and 57 (95%) patients underwent reconstruction for cancer. Early complications included 18 instances (30%) of pneumonia, 19 anastomotic leaks (32%), and 5 instances of graft loss with diversion (8%). Three patients (5%) died in the hospital or within 30 days. After jejunal reconstruction, 50 patients (83%) were able to return to a regular diet. The 90-day mortality rate was 10% (n=6). Characteristic postoperative manometric findings included segmental peristalsis, as is typical for in situ jejunum. Median survival was 28 months and the 5-year survival rate was 30%.

CONCLUSIONS

An SPJ conduit can reestablish or maintain gastrointestinal continuity in high-risk patients when the stomach is unavailable. This is our preferred conduit for reconstruction of the esophagus over the colon.

[Staged oesophageal reconstruction for benign disease]

OBJECTIVES

To assess morbidity, mortality and quality of life after oesophageal reconstruction in patients with oesophageal exclusion for benign diseases.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 2002 to 2011, 20 of 24 patients with esophageal exclusion due to benign disease underwent a delayed reconstruction. We analyzed morbidity, mortality and health-related quality of life using the SF-36 questionnaire, before and after reconstruction.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were operated (16 men and 4 women) with an average age of 54.5 ± 10.5 years. Main causes of oesophageal disconnection were: 10 cases of caustics ingestion, 3 iatrogenic perforations, 4 anastomotic leaks and 3 cases with Boerhaave syndrome. Fourteen (60%) coloplasties and 6 (25%) gastric interpositions were performed with an average time of 212,2 ± 23.5 days after oesophageal exclusion. Pulmonary complications were the most common postoperative complications (55% patients) and according to the modified Clavien classification were divided into: grade 1 (10%), grade 2 (15%), grade 3a (40%), grade 3b (10%), and grade 4a (10%). The 30-day mortality (grade 5) of the series was 10%. Quality of life after reconstruction improved significantly in all analyzed domains of the SF-36 questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

Deferred oesophageal reconstruction is associated with a high morbidity and a mortality rate of 10%. After reconstruction, the quality of life improved in all the parameters evaluated.

End-stage achalasia

Despite symptom improvement offered to achalasia patients by either pneumatic dilation or surgical myotomy, 10% to 15% of those so treated will present progressive deterioration of their esophageal function and up to 5% may eventually require an esophagectomy. The natural evolution of achalasia to its end stage as well as the timing of esophagectomy in these patients form the basis of this review. The optimal reconstruction for the decompensated resected esophagus will also be explored: gastric interposition, colon interposition, and jejunal interposition all have their respective advantages and disadvantages. Their use is examined in the exclusive context of resection for achalasia.

Similar outcomes after primary and secondary esophagocoloplasty for caustic injuries

BACKGROUND

The main purpose of the study was to report a comparative experience with primary and secondary esophagocoloplasty for caustic injuries. Secondary esophagocoloplasty is the main rescue option after graft loss, but data in the literature are scarce.

METHODS

The operative characteristics, postoperative course, and functional outcomes of 21 secondary and of 246 primary esophagocoloplasty operations performed for caustic injuries between 1987 and 2006 were compared. Intraoperative events requiring significant changes in the planned operative strategy, such as graft ischemia or necrosis, were recorded. Statistical tests were performed in both cohorts to identify factors predictive of postoperative graft necrosis. Univariate analysis was performed to identify factors predictive of functional failure after secondary esophagocoloplasty.

RESULTS

Operative mortality (5% vs 4%, p=0.56), morbidity (62% vs 59%, p=0.96), postoperative graft necrosis (14% vs 7%, p=0.16), and functional success (68% vs 70%, p=0.79) rates of the secondary and primary esophagocoloplasty operations were similar. Intraoperative graft ischemia at the time of secondary esophagocoloplasty was significantly associated with the risk of postoperative graft necrosis (p=0.015) and functional failure (p=0.046). At the time of primary esophagocoloplasty, intraoperative necrosis of the colon was the only independent predictive factor of postoperative graft necrosis (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary esophagocoloplasty is a safe and reliable salvage option after primary graft loss in patients with caustic injuries. Delayed esophagocoloplasty should be considered if intraoperative colon necrosis occurs at the time of primary reconstruction.

Safe esophageal reconstruction by ileocolic interposition

Many techniques have been proposed for esophageal reconstruction after esophagectomy when a gastric tube cannot be employed. There are two essential criteria for such a substitute: substitute length and sufficient blood supply. We propose ileocolic interposition as an easy and safe option. Two technical aspects contributing to the high success rate of this method are the preservation of an intact arterial network allowing normal blood flow to the ileocolic area, and the ability to quantify blood flow using a Doppler pulse flow meter in six cases. These are enabled by a long (up to 20cm) ileocolic segment. The preservation of the right colic artery is important, because its interruption would reduce blood supply to the long ileum segment. Between July 2003 and October 2008, we used this method in six patients in whom a gastric tube was not an option. We assessed perioperative morbidity and swallowing difficulties in each patient, quantifying dysphagia on scale of 0 to 4. There was no mortality and no anastomotic leak. There was one wound infection, and in one patient, recurrent nerve paralysis was observed. The postoperative hospital stay was 29.5 ± 10.8 days. The average dysphagia score for the six patients was 0.17 ± 0.41 after the operation. All patients can eat normally, without any dietary limitations. Ileocolonic interposition after esophagectomy requires careful assessment of the vascular supply. In this small series, morbidity was low and there was no perioperative mortality. We believe that this is an easy and safe method of reconstruction after esophagectomy in cases in whom a gastric tube cannot be used as a substitute.

Esophageal reconstruction using the terminal ileum and right colon in esophageal cancer surgery

PURPOSE

To evaluate the outcomes of colon interposition based on our surgical experience.

METHODS

We reviewed data from 40 patients who underwent esophagectomy with colon interposition using the terminal ileum and right colon, to treat esophageal cancer, between January 1990 and December 2009.

RESULTS

Transthoracic esophagectomy, transhiatal esophagectomy, and pharyngolaryngoesophagectomy were performed in 31 (77.5%), 8 (20.0%), and 1 (2.5%) patients, respectively. The routes of the colon interposition were posterior mediastinal in 30 (75.0%) patients, retrosternal in 5 (12.5%), and subcutaneous in 5 (12.5%). The median operative time was 450 min (range 320-760 min) and the median blood loss was 755 ml (range 180-3,000 ml). Overall postoperative morbidity involved 18 (45.0%) patients and included esophagoileostomy leakage in 7 (17.5%; minor, n = 4; major, n = 3) and necrosis of the colon conduit in 2 (5%) patients. The 30- and 90-day mortality rates were 0 and 2.5%, respectively. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 80, 66, and 66%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our surgical outcomes were acceptable in relation to other published results and the prognosis was favorable. Thus, esophageal reconstruction using the ileum and right colon is useful for patients with esophageal cancer for whom the stomach is not available. We currently perform colon interposition with microvascular anastomoses for grafts via the subcutaneous route to increase the safety of this operation.

Esophageal reconstruction with colon tissue

The present best practice for performing esophageal reconstruction using colon tissue was investigated in this review. The left colon has advantages in that it has less variation in blood supply and a smaller diameter than the right colon; however, the rate of graft necrosis is higher for the left colon. Additional microvascular anastomosis, which is unnecessary in most cases, may be able to resolve these issues. The colon graft should be reconstructed in an isoperistaltic fashion whenever possible in order to prevent regurgitation and improve food transit. The posterior mediastinum has the advantage of being the shortest route, but it also has the major disadvantage that graft necrosis can be severe or fatal if it occurs. In palliative or advanced cases, a retrosternal or subcutaneous route is preferred, because the posterior mediastinum is a tumor bed. However, in these cases partial excision of the manubrium and the left clavicula should be considered to release compression of the graft at the thoracic inlet. Consequently, the selection of the colon graft should be flexible and be based on the inspection of blood supply and the length needed, and thereafter microvessel anastomosis should be added in cases where graft ischemia might occur.

Pedunculated gastric tube interposition in an esophageal cancer patient with prepyloric adenocarcinoma

Gastric carcinoma is one of the malignancies that are most frequently associated with esophageal carcinoma. We describe herein our device for advanced esophageal cancer associated with early gastric cancer in the antrum. A 57-year-old man presenting with dysphagia and upper abdominal pain was admitted to our hospital. Preoperative examinations revealed locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the middle thoracic esophagus (T3N0M0 Stage IIA) and mucosal signet-ring cell carcinoma of the gastric antrum (T1N0M0 Stage IA). Although the gastric tumor appeared to be an intramucosal carcinoma, its margin was obscure, so endoscopic en-bloc resection was considered inadequate. We chose surgical resection of the gastric tumor as well as the esophageal SCC after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin for advanced esophageal cancer. Following transthoracic esophagectomy with three-field lymph node dissection, the gastric carcinoma was removed by gastric antrectomy, which preserved the right gastroepiploic vessels, and a pedunculated short gastric tube was used as the esophageal substitute. Twenty-eight months after the surgery, the patient is well with no evidence of cancer recurrence. Because it minimizes surgical stress and organ sacrifice, gastric tube interposition is a potentially useful technique for esophageal cancer associated with localized early gastric cancer.