Treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: large, collaborative, observational TENTACLE cohort study

Addressing Anastomotic Leak After Esophagectomy: Insights from a Specialized Unit

Background/Objectives: Anastomotic leakage is one of the most frightening and potentially fatal complications after esophagectomy. The collaboration between the surgical team, interventional gastroenterologists, and radiologists has the potential to improve the hospital stay, as well as morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study is to present our experience and evaluate the results of the multimodal management of anastomotic leak following esophagectomy in our unit. Methods: This is a retrospective study analyzing a single referral center's prospectively maintained database of all patients diagnosed with anastomotic leak between March 2019 and March 2025 using the definition of the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group. The treatment pathways and the patient outcomes are presented. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality and in-hospital mortality. Results: A total of 241 esophageal resections were performed between March 2019 and March 2025. Lymphadenectomy of the mediastinum was performed in 88.4% of the patients. Cervical and intrathoracic anastomosis were performed in 143 (59.3%) and 98 (40.7%) cases, respectively. Twenty-nine patients (12%) with a mean age of 59.1 years developed anastomotic leak. Anastomotic leak occurred in 14.3% of intrathoracic anastomoses and 10.5% of cervical anastomoses. The median day of leak diagnosis was the sixth postoperative day. Leak management involved conservative strategies, wound exploration, endoscopic stent placement or vacuum therapy, drainage of effusions under radiologic guidance, and reoperation. The 90-day and in-hospital mortality rate was 3.4%. No cases of conduit necrosis or mediastinitis were reported. Endoscopic management was employed in 18 patients (62.1%) as a first- or second-line treatment, while reoperation was required in 6 patients (20.7%). The median interval from diagnosis to anastomosis healing was 21 days and the median duration of hospital stay 32 days. The management was successful in 27 patients (93.1%) except for 1 who developed tracheoesophageal fistula and 1 who died due to hemorrhagic complication of anticoagulant treatment. Conclusions: Anastomotic leak after esophagectomy is considered a complex, diversified, and morbid clinical entity. The evolving potential of multidisciplinary management encompassing surgical and interventional radiological and endoscopic treatment addresses the mortality rates and heralds a new era of minimizing morbidity.

TreatmENT of AnastomotiC LeakagE after colon cancer resection: the TENTACLE - Colon study

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a common and severe complication after colon cancer resection, but studies investigating various treatment strategies and factors influencing outcomes are scarce.

OBJECTIVES

(1) To identify predictive factors associated with 90-day mortality and 90-day Clavien-Dindo grade 4-5 complications amongst patients who developed AL following colon cancer resection with subsequent development and validation of prediction models, and (2) to explore and compare the effectiveness of various treatment strategies for AL following colon cancer resection, adjusting for type of index surgery, different leak entities and patient factors.

METHODS

The TENTACLE - Colon is an international multicentre retrospective cohort study. Consecutive patients with AL after colon cancer resection operated between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2022 from participating centres will be included. The planned sample size is 2000 patients. The primary outcome is 90-day mortality and the co-primary composite endpoint is Clavien-Dindo grade 4-5 complications. Secondary outcomes include: hospital and intensive care unit length of stay, number of radiological and surgical reinterventions within one year after resection, mortality (in-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year), the comprehensive complication index, and 1-year stoma-free survival. For objective 1, regression models will be used to identify predictors associated with 90-day mortality and grade 4-5 complications. For objective 2, comparative analyses of various treatment strategies will be performed for the specified outcomes, adjusting for patient, tumour, resection and leakage characteristics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT06528054) since July 30th, 2024.

Effect of Neoadjuvant Therapy on Endoluminal Vacuum-Assisted Closure Therapy (EVAC) for Anastomotic Leakage After Oesophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a dreaded complication after oesophagectomy. Endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure therapy (EVAC) has been increasingly used as a first-line treatment for AL. We aimed to identify any potential adverse effects of a neoadjuvant therapy (chemotherapy (CT) or radiochemotherapy (RCT)) on EVAC.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study at our tertiary centre between 2013 and 2024. All patients who underwent EVAC for AL after oesophagectomy were included in this study. Parameters such as success rate, length of therapy, number of sponges needed, changes in treatment, and survival were analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients were included, 19 of whom received CT/RCT and 10 of whom received no neoadjuvant treatment (NT). There was no significant difference in patient survival (30-day survival rate CT/RCT n = 1 (5.3%) vs. NT n = 1 (10%), p = 0.632), success rate (CT/RCT n = 15 (78.9%) vs. NT n = 9 (90%), p = 0.454), and length of therapy (CT/RCT vs. NT 24.11 vs. 23.8, p = 0.681), the number of sponges required (CT/RCT vs. NT 6.26 vs. 6.6, p = 0.835), and the need for changing treatment (CT/RCT n = 5 (26.3%) vs. NT n = 1 (10%), p = 0.303).

CONCLUSIONS

NT did not affect the success rate or length of therapy. Thus, we found no significant influence of CT/RCT on EVAC for AL after oesophagectomy.

Multicenter study on the incidence and treatment of mediastinal leaks after esophagectomy (MuMeLe 2)

BACKGROUND

Management of mediastinal anastomotic leaks (MALs) after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy includes conservative, endoscopic, or surgical management. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVAC) is becoming a routine approach for MALs, although the outcomes have not been defined. This study aimed to describe the incidence, treatment, and outcomes of MALs in patients who underwent esophagectomy in 3 Italian high-volume centers that routinely use EVAC for MAL.

METHODS

Patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy between September 2018 and March 2023 were included.

RESULTS

A total of 681 patients underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, of whom 88 had MAL. The MAL rates for open, minimally invasive, and robotic esophagectomies were 11.5%, 13.4%, and 14.8%, respectively. Global and specific 30- and 90-day mortality rates for MAL were 0.9% and 2.1% and 6.8% and 15.9%, respectively. Nonoperative management (NOM) as the primary treatment was chosen for 62 patients. EVAC was the most common NOM (62.9%), and the most common operative management (OM) was anastomotic redo (53.8%). Diversion was the OM for 7 patients, of whom 3 patients died. Primary treatment proved successful in 40 patients. Among them, EVAC alone was successful in 35.9% of patients. Globally, endoscopic treatment, including EVAC, was successful in 79.0% of NOM and 55.7% of MALs. NOM and OM were chosen as secondary treatments for 27 and 10 patients, respectively. Secondary treatment proved successful in 21 patients.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of MALs after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy is approximately 13%. Endoscopic techniques have a success rate of almost 80%, with EVAC representing a significant part of this treatment process.

Impact of perioperative decreased serum albumin level on anastomotic leakage in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by minimally invasive esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a severe complication following esophagectomy with high mortality. Perioperative decreased serum albumin level is considered a predictive of AL, however, its impact on AL incidence in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) followed by minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is not well defined.

METHODS

The data of 318 consecutive esophageal cancer patients who underwent MIE were collected retrospectively from January 2021 to December 2021. The perioperative level of albumin was detected and the baseline of altering levels for albumin was established. The incidence of postoperative complications and survival rate were analyzed between groups.

RESULTS

After exclusion, 137 patients were enrolled and assigned to more decreased albumin (MA) and less decreased albumin (LA) groups. The levels of albumin descended significantly after MIE (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the clinicopathologic characteristics or surgical outcomes between groups. The incidence of postoperative AL was 10.2% in MA group and 1.4% in LA group (p = 0.033). Three patients died due to AL in MA group, while no mortality was observed in LA group (p = 0.120). The rate of other postoperative complications was similar between groups. Progression-free survival (PFS) in LA group was a little higher than that in MA group, but it was no significant difference (p = 0.853). Similarly, no difference was observed in overall survival (OS) between groups (p = 0.277).

CONCLUSIONS

Severely deficient serum albumin after MIE was an indicator of AL in esophageal cancer patients treated with NCT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese clinical trial registry: ChiCTR2200066694, registered December14th,2022. https://www.chictr.org.cn/edit.aspx?pid=185067&htm=4 .