Diagnosing anastomotic leak post-esophagectomy: a systematic review

Root cause analysis of mortality after esophagectomy for cancer: a multicenter cohort study from the FREGAT database

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is associated with significant mortality. A better understanding of the causes leading to death may help to reduce mortality. A root cause analysis of mortality after esophagectomy was performed.

METHODS

Root cause analysis was retrospectively applied by an independent expert panel of 4 upper gastrointestinal surgeons and 1 anesthesiologist-intensivist to patients included in the French national multicenter prospective cohort FREGAT between August 2014 and September 2019 who underwent an esophagectomy for cancer and died within 90 days of surgery. A cause-and-effect diagram was used to determine the root causes related to death. Death was classified as potentially preventable or non-preventable.

RESULTS

Among the 1,040 patients included in the FREGAT cohort, 70 (6.7%) patients (male: 81%, median age 68 [62-72] years) from 17 centers were included. Death was potentially preventable in 37 patients (53%). Root causes independently associated with preventable death were inappropriate indication (odds ratio 35.16 [2.50-494.39]; P = .008), patient characteristics (odds ratio 5.15 [1.19-22.35]; P = .029), unexpected intraoperative findings (odds ratio 18.99 [1.07-335.55]; P = .045), and delay in diagnosis of a complication (odds ratio 98.10 [6.24-1,541.04]; P = .001). Delay in treatment of a complication was found only in preventable deaths (28 [76%] vs 0; P < .001). National guidelines were less frequently followed (16 [43%] vs 22 [67%]; P = .050) in preventable deaths. The only independent risk factor of preventable death was center volume <26 esophagectomies per year (odds ratio 4.71 [1.55-14.33]; P = .006).

CONCLUSIONS

More than one-half of deaths after esophagectomy were potentially preventable. Better patient selection, early diagnosis, and adequate management of complications through centralization could reduce mortality.

VAC-Stent in the Treatment of Post-Esophagectomy Anastomotic Leaks: A New "Kid on the Block" Who Marries the Best of Old Techniques-A Review

Esophagectomy, while a pivotal treatment for esophageal cancer, is not without adverse events. Among these, anastomotic leak (AL) is the most feared complication, threatening patient lives and incurring significant healthcare costs. The management of AL is complex and lacks standardization. Given the high morbidity and mortality rates associated with redo-surgery, which poses risks for already fragile patients, various endoscopic treatments have been developed over time. Self-expandable metallic stents (SEMSs) were the most widely used treatment until the early 2000s. The mechanism of action of SEMSs includes covering the wall defect, protecting it from secretions, and promoting healing. In 2010, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) emerged as a viable alternative for treating ALs, quickly gaining acceptance in clinical practice. EVT involves placing a dedicated sponge under negative pressure inside or adjacent to the wall defect, aiming to clear the leak and promote granulation tissue formation. More recently, the VAC-Stent entered the scenario of endoscopic treatment of post-esophagectomy ALs. This device combines a fully covered SEMS with an integrated EVT sponge, blending the ability of SEMSs to exclude defects and maintain the patency of the esophageal lumen with the capacity of EVT to aspirate secretions and promote the formation of granulation tissue. Although the literature on this new device is not extensive, early results from the application of VAC-Stent have shown promising outcomes. This review aims to synthesize the preliminary efficacy and safety data on the device, thoroughly analyze its advantages over traditional techniques and disadvantages, explore areas for improvement, and propose future directions.

Gastrointestinal Fistula in Radical Distal Gastrectomy: Case-Control Study from a High-Volume Hospital

Background: Postoperative gastrointestinal fistula (PGF) is one of the main causes of abdominal infection and perioperative death. This study was designed to investigate the risk factors of PGF, anastomotic fistula (AF), and duodenal stump fistula (DSF) for patients who underwent radical distal gastrectomy. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective observational study, 2652 gastric cancer cases who received radical distal gastrectomy from 2010 to 2020 were selected as research subjects. Subsequently, we adopted the univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis as statistical method to screen the risk factors for PGF, AF, and DSF, respectively. Results: In univariate analysis, gender (P = .022), operative time (P = .013), intraoperative blood loss (P < .001), tumor diameter (P = .002), and tumor stage (P < .001) were related to PGF. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified the male (odds ratio [OR] = 2.691, P = .042), massive intraoperative hemorrhage (OR = 1.002, P = .008), and advanced tumor (OR = 2.522, P = .019) as independent predictors for PGF. Moreover, diabetes (OR = 4.497, P = .008) and massive intraoperative hemorrhage (OR = 1.003, P = .010) were proved to be associated with AF, while massive intraoperative hemorrhage (OR = 1.001, P = .050) and advanced tumor (OR = 6.485, P = .005) were independent risk factors of DSF. Conclusions: The gender, intraoperative hemorrhage, tumor stage, and diabetes were expected to be used as predictors of PGF for radical distal gastrectomy.

CRP as an early indicator for anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy for cancer: a single tertiary gastro-esophageal center study

PURPOSE

To determine the relationship between postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) as an early indicator of anastomotic leakage (AL) after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

We reviewed patients diagnosed with esophageal or esophagogastric junctional cancer who underwent esophagectomy between 2006 and 2022 at the Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated relative risk for AL by calculating the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The cut-off values for CRP were based on the maximum Youden's index using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 612 patients were included, with 464 (75.8%) in the non-AL (N-AL) group and 148 (24.2%) in the AL group. Preoperative body mass index and the proportion of patients with the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification 3 were significantly higher in the AL group than in the N-AL group. The median day of AL occurrence was the postoperative day (POD) 8. Trends in CRP levels from POD 2 to 3 and POD 3 to 4 were significantly higher in the AL than in the N-AL group. An increase in CRP of ≥ 4.65% on POD 2 to 3 was an independent risk factor for AL with the highest OR of 3.67 (95% CI 1.66-8.38, p = 0.001) in patients with CRP levels on POD 2 above 211 mg/L.

CONCLUSION

Early changes in postoperative CRP levels may help to detect AL early following esophageal cancer surgery.

Diagnosis and management of anastomotic leaks after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: a single-center experience

PURPOSE

Esophageal anastomotic leaks (ALs) after esophagectomy are a common and serious complication. The incidence, diagnostic approach, and management have changed over time. We described the diagnosis and management of patients who developed an esophageal AL after an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy at our center.

METHODS

After IRB approval, we queried our prospectively maintained database for patients who developed an esophageal AL after esophagectomy from August 2016 through July 2022. Data pertaining to demographics, comorbidities, surgical and oncological characteristics, and clinical course were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 145 patients underwent an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy; 10 (6.9%) developed an AL, diagnosed a median of 7.5 days after surgery, and detected by enteric contents in wound drains (n = 3), endoscopy (n = 3), CT (n = 2), and contrast esophagogram (n = 2). Nine patients (90%) had an increasing white blood cell count and additional signs of sepsis. One asymptomatic patient was identified by contrast esophagography. All patients received enteral nutritional support, intravenous antibiotics, and antifungals. Primary treatment of ALs included endoscopic placement of a self-expanding metal stent (SEMS; n = 6), surgery (n = 2), and SEMS with endoluminal vacuum therapy (n = 2). One patient required surgery after SEMS placement. The median length of ICU and total hospital stays were 11.5 and 22.5 days, respectively. There was no 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of esophageal ALs at our center is similar to that of other high-volume centers. Most ALs can be managed without surgery; however, ALs remain a significant source of postoperative morbidity despite clinical advancements that have improved mortality.

A risk scoring system for early diagnosis of anastomotic leakage after subtotal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most critical postoperative complications after subtotal esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer. This study attempted to develop an optimal scoring system for stratifying the risk for AL.

METHODS

The study included 171 patients who underwent subtotal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer followed by esophagogastrostomy in the cervical region from January 2011 to April 2021 at Nagoya University Hospital. AL was defined by radiologic or endoscopic evidence of anastomotic breakdown using some modalities. A risk scoring system for an early diagnosis of AL was established using factors determined in the multivariate analysis. A score was calculated for each patient, and the patients were classified into three categories according to the risk for AL: low-, intermediate- and high-risk. The trend of the risk for AL among the categories was evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients (17%) developed AL. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that sinistrous gross features of drain fluid (P < 0.001; odds ratio (OR), 10.2), radiologic air bubble sign (P < 0.001; OR, 15.0) and the level of drain amylase ≥280 U/L on postoperative Day 7 (P < 0.001; OR, 9.0) were significantly associated with AL. According to the matching number of the above three risk factors and categorization into three risk groups, the incidence of AL was 6.1% (8/131) in the low-risk group, 45.5% (15/33) in the intermediate-risk group and 85.7% (6/7) in the high-risk group (area under curve, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

The present AL-risk scoring system may be useful in postoperative patient care after subtotal esophagectomy.

Endoscopic Internal Drainage Achieving Successful Closure of Iatrogenic Pharyngoesophageal Fistula

Endoscopic internal drainage (EID) is a minimally invasive endoscopic technique that effectively closes upper gastrointestinal fistulas. We report the successful closure of an oropharyngeal fistula in a 78-year-old man with a history of supraglottic squamous cell carcinoma. He presented with inspiratory stridor after biopsy of a lateral wall lesion in the piriformis sinus. Imaging showed a fistula tract between the piriformis sinus and the esophagus. EID was performed using a double-pigtail stent inserted inside the fistula. Eventually, repeat imaging showed evidence of fistula closure. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of using EID for repairing an oropharyngeal fistula.

Performance of a consensus-based algorithm for diagnosing anastomotic leak after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common and severe complication after esophagectomy. This study aimed to assess the performance of a consensus-based algorithm for diagnosing AL after minimally invasive esophagectomy. This study used data of the ICAN trial, a multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing cervical and intrathoracic anastomosis, in which a predefined diagnostic algorithm was used to guide diagnosing AL. The algorithm identified patients suspected of AL based on clinical signs, blood C-reactive protein (cut-off value 200 mg/L), and/or drain amylase (cut-off value 200 IU/L). Suspicion of AL prompted evaluation with contrast swallow computed tomography and/or endoscopy to confirm AL. Primary outcome measure was algorithm performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), respectively. AL was defined according to the definition of the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group. 245 patients were included, and 125 (51%) patients were suspected of AL. The algorithm had a sensitivity of 62% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 46-75), a specificity of 97% (95% CI: 89-100), and a PPV and NPV of 94% (95% CI: 79-99) and 77% (95% CI: 66-86), respectively, on initial assessment. Repeated assessment in 19 patients with persisting suspicion of AL despite negative or inconclusive initial assessment had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 77-100). The algorithm showed poor performance because the low sensitivity indicates the inability of the algorithm to confirm AL on initial assessment. Repeated assessment using the algorithm was needed to confirm remaining leaks.

Predictability of Endoscopic Success for Foregut and Bariatric Leak in an Experienced Quaternary Center

BACKGROUND

Leaks of the esophagus and stomach are difficult to manage and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic therapy can manage these leaks without surgical intervention. Our goal is to create a scoring tool to aid in predicting the success of endoscopic therapy in these patients.

STUDY DESIGN

An IRB-approved prospectively maintained database was retrospectively reviewed for all patients treated for gastrointestinal leaks from July 2013 to January 2021, including patients treated for esophageal and stomach leaks. Endpoints include success of leak closure for patients treated solely by endoscopic therapy (ET) compared with surgical therapy as failed endoscopic therapy (FET). A multivariable logistic regression model was fitted to identify independent risk factors for predicting success of endoscopic therapy, and a scoring calculator was developed.

RESULTS

There were 80 patients (60 females) with a mean age of 50 years. The ET group included 59 patients (74%), whereas the FET group included 21 patients (26%). Patient demographics, comorbidities, surgical history, and timing of leak diagnosis were used. Multivariable analysis resulted in 4 variables associated with higher probability of successful endoscopic leak management without need for additional surgery. These included increased age, lower BMI, lack of previous bariatric surgery, and quicker identification of the leak. Consequently, a scoring nomogram was developed with values from 0 to 22.

CONCLUSION

Our data show the development of a scoring calculator capable of quantifying the likelihood of success treating foregut and bariatric leaks with endoscopic therapies. This can be used clinically to guide treatment decisions.

Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak in patients after oesophagectomy: the SEAL score

Background

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common but severe complication after oesophagectomy. It is unknown how to determine the severity of AL objectively at diagnosis. Determining leak severity may guide treatment decisions and improve future research. This study aimed to identify leak-related prognostic factors for mortality, and to develop a Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak (SEAL) score.

Methods

This international, retrospective cohort study in 71 centres worldwide included patients with AL after oesophagectomy between 2011 and 2019. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. Leak-related prognostic factors were identified after adjusting for confounders and were included in multivariable logistic regression to develop the SEAL score. Four classes of leak severity (mild, moderate, severe, and critical) were defined based on the risk of 90-day mortality, and the score was validated internally.

Results

Some 1509 patients with AL were included and the 90-day mortality rate was 11.7 per cent. Twelve leak-related prognostic factors were included in the SEAL score. The score showed good calibration and discrimination (c-index 0.77, 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 0.81). Higher classes of leak severity graded by the SEAL score were associated with a significant increase in duration of ICU stay, healing time, Comprehensive Complication Index score, and Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group classification.

Conclusion

The SEAL score grades leak severity into four classes by combining 12 leak-related predictors and can be used to the assess severity of AL after oesophagectomy.

Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak in patients after oesophagectomy: the SEAL score

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common but severe complication after oesophagectomy. It is unknown how to determine the severity of AL objectively at diagnosis. Determining leak severity may guide treatment decisions and improve future research. This study aimed to identify leak-related prognostic factors for mortality, and to develop a Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak (SEAL) score.

METHODS

This international, retrospective cohort study in 71 centres worldwide included patients with AL after oesophagectomy between 2011 and 2019. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. Leak-related prognostic factors were identified after adjusting for confounders and were included in multivariable logistic regression to develop the SEAL score. Four classes of leak severity (mild, moderate, severe, and critical) were defined based on the risk of 90-day mortality, and the score was validated internally.

RESULTS

Some 1509 patients with AL were included and the 90-day mortality rate was 11.7 per cent. Twelve leak-related prognostic factors were included in the SEAL score. The score showed good calibration and discrimination (c-index 0.77, 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 0.81). Higher classes of leak severity graded by the SEAL score were associated with a significant increase in duration of ICU stay, healing time, Comprehensive Complication Index score, and Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group classification.

CONCLUSION

The SEAL score grades leak severity into four classes by combining 12 leak-related predictors and can be used to the assess severity of AL after oesophagectomy.

Early versus the traditional start of oral intake following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nil by mouth is considered the standard of care during the first days following esophagectomy. However, with the routine implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery, early oral intake is more likely to be the preferred mode of nutrition following esophagectomy. The present study aims to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of early oral intake following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated as the effect sizes for continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with a total of 1947 patients were included. Length of hospital stay (WMD =  - 3.94, CI: - 4.98 to - 2.90; P < 0.001), the time to first flatus (WMD =  - 1.13, CI: - 1.25 to - 1.01; P < 0.001) and defecation (WMD =  - 1.26, CI: - 1.82 to - 0.71; P < 0.001) favored the early oral intake group. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality (OR = 1.23, CI: 0.45 to 3.36; P = 0.69). Early oral intake also did not increase the risk of pneumonia and overall postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence indicates early oral intake following esophagectomy seems to be safe and effective. It may be the preferred mode of nutrition following esophagectomy. However, more high-quality studies are still needed to further validate this conclusion.

Imaging of postoperative complications following Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy

Postoperative imaging plays a key role in the identification of complications after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (ILE). Careful analysis of imaging examinations can help identify the cause of the presenting symptoms and the mechanism of the complication. The complex surgical procedure used in ILE results in anatomical changes that make imaging interpretation challenging for many radiologists. The purpose of this review was to make radiologists more familiar with the imaging findings of normal anatomical changes and those of complications following ILE to enable accurate evaluation of patients with an altered postoperative course. Anastomotic leak, gastric conduit necrosis and pleuropulmonary complications are the most serious complications after ILE. Computed tomography used in conjunction with oral administration of contrast material is the preferred diagnostic tool, although it conveys limited sensitivity for the diagnosis of anastomotic fistula. In combination with early endoscopic assessment, it can also help early recognition of complications and appropriate therapeutic management.