Esophagogastrectomy without pyloroplasty

Acute gastric conduit dilation after minimally invasive esophagectomy: a 10-year experience

Despite decreasing overall morbidity with minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), conduit functional outcomes related to delayed emptying remain challenging, especially in the immediate postoperative setting. Yet, this problem has not been described well in the literature. Utilizing a single institutional prospective database, 254 patients who underwent MIEs between 2012 and 2020 were identified. Gastric conduit dilation was defined as a conduit occupying >40% of the hemithorax on the postoperative chest X-ray. Sixty-seven patients (26.4%) demonstrated acute conduit dilation. There was a higher incidence of conduit dilation in the patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy compared to those with a neck anastomosis (67.2% vs. 47.1%; P = 0.03). Patients with dilated conduits required more esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD) (P < 0.001), conduit-related reoperations within 180 days (P < 0.001), and 90-day readmissions (P = 0.01). Furthermore, in 37 patients (25.5%) undergoing Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, we returned to the abdomen after intrathoracic anastomosis to reduce redundant conduit and pexy the conduit to the crura. While conduit dilation rates were similar, those who had intraabdominal gastropexy required EGD significantly less and trended toward a lower incidence of conduit-related reoperations (5.6% vs. 2.7%). Multivariable analysis also demonstrated that conduit dilation was an independent predictor for delayed gastric conduit emptying symptoms, EGD within 90 days, conduit-related reoperation within 180 days, and 30-day as well as 90-day readmission. Patients undergoing MIE with acute gastric conduit dilation require more endoscopic interventions and reoperations.

Various Kinds of Functional Digestive Tract Reconstruction Methods After Proximal Gastrectomy

The incidence of proximal gastric cancer has shown a rising trend in recent years. Surgery is still the main way to cure proximal gastric cancer. Total gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection was considered to be the standard procedure for proximal gastric cancer in the past several decades. However, in recent years, many studies have confirmed that proximal gastrectomy can preserve part of the stomach function and can result in a better quality of life of the patient than total gastrectomy. Therefore, proximal gastrectomy is increasingly used in patients with proximal gastric cancer. Unfortunately, there are some concerns after proximal gastrectomy with traditional esophagogastrostomy. For example, the incidence of reflux esophagitis in patients who underwent proximal gastrectomy with traditional esophagogastrostomy is significantly higher than those patients who underwent total gastrectomy. To solve those problems, various functional digestive tract reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy have been proposed gradually. In order to provide some help for clinical treatment, in this article, we reviewed relevant literature and new clinical developments to compare various kinds of functional digestive tract reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy mainly from perioperative outcomes, postoperative quality of life and survival outcomes aspects. After comparison and discussion, we drew the conclusion that various functional reconstruction methods have their own advantages and disadvantages; large scale high-level clinical studies are needed to choose an ideal reconstruction method in the future. Besides, in clinical practice, surgeons should consider the condition of the patient for individualized selection of the most appropriate reconstruction method.

Surgical Adjuncts During Esophagectomy

Esophagectomy is a major operation whereby intraoperative technique and postoperative care must be optimal. Even in expert hands, the complication rate is as high as 59%. Here the authors discuss the role of surgical adjuncts, including enteral access, nasogastric decompression, pyloric drainage procedures, and anastomotic buttressing as adjuncts to esophagectomy and whether they reduce perioperative complications.

Management of delayed gastric conduit emptying after esophagectomy

Delayed gastric conduit emptying (DGE) is a common complication after esophagectomy. Currently, pyloric interventions are the major prevention and treatment for DGE. In this review, we attempt to evaluate the clinical effect and safety of different pyloric interventions in esophagectomy patients. Moreover, other important management of DGE, including size of esophageal substitute, erythromycin and nasogastric tube (NGT) will also be discussed.

Evaluation of QOL after proximal gastrectomy using a newly developed assessment scale (PGSAS-45)

BACKGROUND

Proximal gastrectomy with esophagogastrostomy (PGEG) has been widely applied as a comparatively simple method. In this study, we used a questionnaire survey to evaluate the influence of various surgical factors on post-operative quality of life (QOL) after PGEG.

METHODS

In this post-gastrectomy syndrome assessment study, we analyzed QOL in 2,368 cases. Among these, 193 had undergone proximal gastrectomy and 115 had undergone PGEG. The Post-Gastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale (PGSAS)-45 is a questionnaire consisting of 45 items, including the SF-8, the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS), and other symptom items seemed to be specific to post-gastrectomy. The 23 symptom items were composed of seven symptom subscales (SS), including esophageal reflux, abdominal pain, and meal-related distress. These seven SS, total symptom score, ingested amount of food per meal, necessity for additional meals, quality of ingestion SS, ability to work, dissatisfaction with symptoms, dissatisfaction with the meal, dissatisfaction with working, dissatisfaction with daily life SS and change in body weight were evaluated as main outcome measures. In PGEG cases, we evaluated the influence on QOL of various surgical factors, such as procedures to prevent gastroesophageal regurgitation and size of the remnant stomach.

RESULTS

The scores for esophageal reflux and dissatisfaction with the meal were higher in patients who had not undergone an anti-reflux procedure. In most cases, the preserved remnant stomach was more than two-thirds the size of the pre-operative stomach. When comparing patients with a remnant stomach two-thirds the pre-operative size and those with more than three-quarters, the diarrhea SS and necessity for additional meals scores were lower in the group with more than three-quarters. The indigestion, constipation, and abdominal pain subscales, and the total symptom score, were higher in patients who had not undergone pyloric bougie than in those who had.

CONCLUSION

These results indicated that QOL was better in patients with a large remnant stomach. Procedures to prevent gastroesophageal reflux, and the use of pyloric bougie as a complementary drainage procedure, were considered effective ways to reduce the deterioration of QOL.

Should we continue to drain the pylorus in patients undergoing an esophagectomy?

A systematic review of the literature was performed to assess the necessity of a pyloric drainage procedure during an esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction. Earlier data recommend performing a pyloric drainage procedure for all esophagectomies; however, recent studies have questioned this. A thorough literature search (January 2001-November 2011) was performed using the terms esophagectomy, pyloroplasty, pyloromyotomy, botulinum toxin, and pyloric drainage. Only studies that compared patient outcome after undergoing an esophagectomy with a pyloric drainage procedure with those undergoing an esophagectomy without a pyloric drainage procedure were selected. Only four studies, comprising 668 patients in total, were identified that compared patient outcome after undergoing an esophagectomy with or without a pyloric drainage procedure, and two additional meta-analyses were identified and selected for discussion. All studies were retrospective, and because of the heterogeneity of studies, patient demographics, reporting, and statistical analysis of patient outcome, pooling of data and meta-analysis could not be performed. Careful analysis demonstrated that pyloric drainage procedure was associated with a non-significant trend for delayed gastric emptying and biliary reflux, while not affecting the incidence of dumping. No correlation was determined between a pyloric drainage procedure and anastomotic leaks, postoperative pulmonary complications, length of hospital stay, and overall perioperative morbidity. While there are risks associated with a pyloric drainage procedure and data exist supporting its omission during an esophagectomy, no good conclusion can be drawn from the current literature. Larger multi-institutional, prospective studies are required to definitively answer this question.

Delayed gastric emptying after esophagectomy for malignancy

BACKGROUND

Controversy still exists about the need for pyloric drainage procedures after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction. Although pyloric drainage may prevent postoperative delayed gastric emptying (DGE), it may also promote dumping syndrome and bile reflux. The aims of this study were to audit the incidence and management of DGE in patients without routine pyloric drainage after esophagectomy in a university medical center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From July 2006 to June 2012, data from 356 consecutive patients who underwent esophagectomy with a gastric conduit without pyloric drainage for esophageal or gastric cardia carcinoma were reviewed. Major observation parameters were the incidence, management, and outcomes of DGE.

RESULTS

Overall incidence of DGE was 15.7% (56 of 356). Early DGE developed in 26 patients, and late DGE developed in 30 patients. There were no differences in demographic and intraoperative data between the two groups with or without DGE. More DGE was documented in patients with an intra-right thoracic gastric conduit (P=.031). A higher incidence of postoperative pneumonia was observed in patients exhibiting early DGE, but without significance (P=.254). There were also no significant impacts on respiratory failure (P=.848) and anastomotic leakage (P=.257). There was an increased postoperative hospital stay with DGE, but without significance (P=.089). Endoscopic balloon dilatation of the pylorus was used to manage 33.9% of patients with DGE, yielding a 78.9% (15 of 19) success rate without complications. In 3 patients endoscopy showed the pylorus was open, and their symptoms improved over time. One patient with tumor-related DGE was treated by pyloric stent. The remaining patients were adequately treated with conservative management.

CONCLUSIONS

Omitting the operative drainage procedure does not lead to an increased frequency of DGE after esophagectomy with a gastric conduit. Many patients responded to conservative management, and endoscopic balloon pyloric dilatation can be effective in managing the DGE postoperatively.

Esophagogastrostomy plus gastrojejunostomy: a novel reconstruction procedure after curative resection for proximal gastric cancer

OBJECTIVE

The choice of surgical strategy for patients with proximal gastric cancer remains controversial. In this study, we recommend that a new reconstruction procedure be performed following proximal gastrectomy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study involving 71 patients who underwent gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer. Clinicopathological features, postoperative complications, nutritional status, and overall survival (OS) rate were compared among three different reconstruction approaches.

RESULTS

There were 34 cases of proximal gastrectomy followed by esophagogastrostomy reconstruction (EG), 16 cases of total gastrectomy and Roux-en Y reconstruction (RY) and 21 cases of proximal gastrectomy followed by esophagogastrostomy plus gastrojejunostomy reconstruction (EGJ). Though the clinicopathological features, the nutritional status and OS rate were similar among the three groups of patients, the incidence of reflux esophagitis was significantly higher in the EG group (35.3%) than the RY (6.2%) and EGJ (9.6%) groups(P < 0.05). Few EGJ patients suffered from either reflux esophagitis or anastomotic stenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The EGJ reconstruction method helps to resolve the syndrome of reflux esophagitis. Our data indicates that it is a simple, safe, and effective reconstruction procedure for PGC.

The impact of pyloric drainage on clinical outcome following esophagectomy: a systematic review

Delayed emptying of the gastric conduit following esophagectomy can be associated with an increased incidence of complications including aspiration pneumonia and anastomotic leak. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the current modalities of pyloric drainage following esophagectomy and their impact on anastomotic integrity and postoperative morbidity. Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane library, trial registries, and conference proceedings were searched. Five pyloric management strategies following esophagectomy were evaluated: no intervention, botulinum toxin (botox) injection, finger fracture, pyloroplasty, and pyloromyotomy. Outcomes evaluated were hospital mortality, anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, delayed gastric emptying, and the late complication of bile reflux. Twenty-five publications comprising 3172 patients were analyzed. Pooled analysis of six comparative studies published after 2000 revealed pyloric drainage to be associated with a nonsignificant trend toward a reduced incidence of anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, and delayed gastric emptying. Overall, the current level of evidence regarding the merits of individual pyloric drainage strategies remains very poor. There is significant heterogeneity in the definitions of clinical outcomes, in particular delayed gastric emptying, which has prevented meaningful assessment and formulation of consensus regarding the management of the pylorus during esophagectomy. Pyloric drainage procedures showed a non-significant trend toward fewer anastomotic leaks, pulmonary complications, and reduced gastric stasis when employed following esophagectomy. However, the ideal technique remains unproven suggesting that further collaborative investigations are needed to determine the intervention that will maximize the potential benefits, if any, of pyloric intervention.

Botulinum toxin for prevention of delayed gastric emptying after esophagectomy

Background

Esophageal cancer is among the most common gastrointestinal cancers for which the main treatment is surgery. This study was undertaken to analyze the results of Botox injection in preventing gastric stasis in these patients.

Patients and methods

60 patients with esophageal cancer in the middle and lower third parts were included in our study between 2010 and 2011, and were randomly divided into two groups. In group A, 30 patients underwent pyloroplasty, and in group B, injection of botulinum toxin into the pyloric sphincter muscle was used in 30 patients.

Results

The mean age of these patients was 61 ± 10.7 years and the male/female ratio was 33:27. Isotope scans 3 weeks after surgery showed that 5 patients in group A and 3 in group B had delayed gastric emptying; there was no significant difference between the 2 groups, and the success rate of Botox injection was 90%.

Conclusion

Considering the fact that there was no significant difference between pyloroplasty and Botox injection on gastric emptying after surgery, and given the need to use less-aggressive techniques and facilitate greater use of endoscopic methods, botulinum toxin injection may be used instead of pyloroplasty as a simple, effective, and complication-free method to prevent delayed gastric emptying.

Esophagectomy without thoracotomy: 25 years of experience over 750 patients

Objective

This study aimed to review and evaluate our experience in 750 patients, who underwent transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) and analyze our data. Special attention was paid to some strategies, which we developed in the course of time, regarding the postoperative management of these patients and formulation of improved guidelines.

Patients and methods

This is a retrospective analysis of all THE operations performed between January 1981 until May 2007 in 750 patients: 60 patients (8%) had benign lesions, while 690 (92%) had malignant ones (5.2% of malignancies were located in the upper esophagus, 7.4% in the middle esophagus, 19% in the lower esophagus, and 68.4% at the cardioesophageal junction). THE and esophageal reconstruction were performed at the same operation in all patients. The stomach was our esophageal substitute of first choice with the colon and jejunum being acceptable alternatives in patients with prior gastric surgery and those necessitating synchronous gastrectomy for cancer invasion. A gastric tube was used as an esophageal substitute in 624 patients (83.2%), the whole stomach in 70 (9.4%), the colon in 43 (5.73%), and a jejunal loop in 13 (1.73%).

Results

The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 2.93% (22 patients). There was no intraoperative death. Major complications included atelectasis or pneumonia (4.8%), pleural effusion (22.7%), myocardial infarction (0.5%), recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis (1.33%), and three tracheal lacerations (0.4%). The anastomotic leak rate decreased gradually over time from 29.4% to 11.1% in the last 6 years. The average intraoperative blood loss was 315 ml and 82% of the patients did not receive any blood transfusion. Late functional results were good or excellent in 93%. The average length of hospital stay was 11 days and intensive care unit stay was 2.3 days. The actuarial 5-year survival rate after THE for carcinoma was 21%.

Conclusion

THE is a safe and effective method of esophageal resection with low morbidity and mortality rates and good functional results when performed by experienced surgeons. We believe that our strategies concerning the way of dissecting the cervical esophagus, avoidance of performing pyloromyotomy, the delayed removal of the cervical drain and the delayed advance to oral feeding have reduced, noticeably, morbidity and mortality in our series.

Endoscopic pyloric injection of botulinum toxin-A for the treatment of postvagotomy gastroparesis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of botulinum toxin-A in the treatment of postvagotomy gastroparesis.

METHODS

This open-labeled trial identified and recruited 11 subjects who developed symptomatic gastroparesis after a vagotomy (9 fundoplication, 1 trauma, and 1 exploratory laparotomy). Gastroparesis was defined as an abnormal solid-phase gastric emptying test using the standardized 4-hour radionuclide eggbeater meal method and vagotomy was confirmed with a sham meal challenge test. To complete the study, subjects should have completed the 6-month follow-up visit after their pylorus was injected with botulinum toxin-A injection in a 4-quadrant manner. Patients either received 100 (n = 2) or 200 (n = 9) units of botulinum toxin. Questionnaires recorded symptom severity of gastroparesis at baseline and at monthly intervals for 6 months after the therapy was completed by the patients.

RESULTS

Of the 11 subjects initially recruited, 10 finished the 6-month follow-up visit (7 women). Mean age was 51 years (range, 31-84 years). Mean symptom score at baseline was 16 (95% CI 13-19) and showed a numerical decline to 9 (P > 0.05) over the 6-month period after the procedure (95% CI 5-13). Seven (70%) patients observed >30% improvement in the total symptom score. No complications were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, this open-label study in patients with postvagotomy gastroparesis patients reveals a reduction of gastroparetic symptoms at 1 and 3 months after treatment with pyloric injection of botulinum toxin-A, with return of symptoms by 6 months. Thus, botulinum toxin treatment does not produce a sustained reduction in gastroparetic symptoms in this clinical setting.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy for malignant and premalignant diseases of the esophagus

Minimally invasive approaches increasingly are used to treat esophageal cancer and Barrett's esophagitis with high-grade dysplasia. The goals of a minimally invasive esophageal resection are to provide sound oncologic therapy while minimizing morbidity. This article describes the technique the authors use for laparoscopic-thoracoscopic esophagectomy. Comparison data are presented for alternative endoscopic therapy primarily used in candidates not suitable for surgery.

Anastomotic strictures and delayed gastric emptying after esophagectomy: incidence, risk factors and management

The aim of this study was to report the incidence, risk factors, and management of gastric conduit dysfunction after esophagectomy in 177 patients over a 3-year period in a single center. Patients with anastomotic strictures or delayed gastric emptying (DGE) were identified from a prospective database. Anastomotic strictures occurred in 48 patients (27%). Eighty-three percent of early anastomotic strictures (<1 year) were benign, and all late strictures (>1 year) were malignant. Dilatation was effective in 98% of benign and 64% of malignant strictures. DGE occurred in 21 patients (12%), and was associated with both anastomotic leak (P = 0.001) and anastomotic stricture (P = 0.001). 4/8 patients with late DGE (>3 months postesophagectomy) were tumor-related. Pyloric dilatation was effective in 92% of early and 63% of late DGE. Pyloric stents were inserted in 3 patients with tumor-related DGE. After esophagectomy, early anastomotic strictures (within 1 year) and early delayed gastric emptying (within 3 months) are usually benign and respond to dilatation. However, patients presenting later with tumor-related obstruction are unlikely to respond to anastomotic or pyloric dilatation and should be stented.

Vagotomy during hiatal hernia repair: a benign esophageal lengthening procedure

INTRODUCTION

This study describes the use of vagotomy in patients during complex laparoscopic esophageal surgery (e.g., reoperative antireflux surgery (rLARS) or paraesophageal hernia (PEH) repair) when, after extensive esophageal mobilization, the gastroesophageal junction cannot be made to reach the abdomen without tension. In doing so, we hope to understand the risk incurred by vagus nerve division in this setting in order to evaluate its role in managing the short esophagus.

METHODS

One hundred and sixty-six patients underwent rLARS or PEH repair between 1/1998 and 6/2003 at our institution. Clinical data was obtained from a prospectively maintained database and systematic patient questionnaires administered for this study. Follow-up was available for 102 (61%) of these patients, at a median of 19 months (range 6-69 months).

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients underwent rLARS while 50 patients underwent PEH repair. Thirty patients had a vagotomy during the course of their operation (Vag Group; 20 anterior, six posterior, four bilateral), 13 in the rLARS group (25%), and 17 in the PEH group (34%). The primary presenting symptoms for rLARS and PEH repair patients were improved in 89% in the Vag Group and 91% in the No Vag Group. Similarly, there was no difference in the severity of abdominal pain, bloating, diarrhea, or early satiety between the Vag and No Vag groups at follow-up. No patient required a subsequent operation for gastric outlet obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Vagotomy during rLARS and PEH repair does not lead to a higher rate delayed gastric emptying, dumping syndrome, or other side effects. Thus, we propose vagotomy to be a legitimate alternative to Collis gastroplasty when extensive mobilization of the esophagus fails to provide adequate esophageal length.

[Complications of surgical resection of esophageal cancer]

Esophageal resection has undergone refinements over recent years, with improved outcomes. However, in-hospital mortality remains above 10% in developed countries and is below 5% in only a select group of hospitals. Morbidity remains high even in high-volume hospitals. We reviewed risk factors in esophageal resection. Pulmonary complications occur mainly in older patients and in those with pulmonary dysfunction, especially %FEV1 or hypoxia. Liver cirrhosis, squamous cell cancer, low patient volume, and cervical anastomoses also increase complication rates. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, which may be effective in squamous cell tumors, can also increase morbidity. The main cause of morbidity and mortality are pleuropulmonary complications. Also significant are anastomotic leak and esophageal conduit necrosis. A complex procedure such as esophageal resection is better served in specialized teams.

Adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and cardia: a review of the disease and its treatment

BACKGROUND

Over the past 50 years there has been a remarkable change in the epidemiology of esophageal cancer. Previously rare, adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction is now the most common esophageal cancer, and in the United States the incidence is increasing faster than that of any other malignancy. Surveillance in patients with Barrett's esophagus is identifying adenocarcinoma at an earlier, more curable stage in many patients, and at the same time new endoscopic and surgical options are available for the therapy of these localized tumors.

METHODS

This article is a review of the epidemiology, diagnosis, staging, and treatment options for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

RESULTS

The epidemiology, prognosis, patterns of lymphatic metastasis, and survival for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma suggest that these tumors are similar. New options for therapy, as well as the results of surgical resection with and without chemoradiotherapy, are reviewed.

CONCLUSIONS

Surveillance programs for Barrett's are identifying patients with early, curable adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. Therapy for more advanced tumors hinges on local control of the disease and the eradication of systemic metastases.