O-OGC08 The Impact of Anastomotic Techniques on Post-operative Anastomotic Complications: Results of the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA)

Background

The optimal anastomotic techniques in esophagectomy to minimize rates of anastomotic leakage (AL) and conduit necrosis (CN) are not known. The aim of this study was to assess whether anastomotic technique is associated with anastomotic failure after esophagectomy in the international Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA) cohort.

Methods

This prospective observational multicenter cohort study included patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer over nine months in 2018. The primary exposure was the anastomotic technique, classified as handsewn, linear stapled or circular stapled. The primary outcome was a composite of AL and CN, as defined by the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to identify the strength of association between anastomotic techniques and anastomotic failure.

Results

Of the 2238 esophagectomies, the anastomosis was handsewn in 27.1%, linear stapled in 21.0% and circular stapled in 51.9%. Anastomotic techniques differed significantly between the anastomosis site (p < 0.001), with the majority of neck anastomoses being handsewn (69.9%), whilst most chest anastomoses were stapled (66.3% circular stapled, 19.3% linear stapled). Rates of AL/CN differed significantly between the anastomotic techniques (p < 0.001), from 19.3% in handsewn anastomoses, to 14.0% in linear stapled, and 12.1% in circular stapled. This was confirmed by multivariable analysis (Odds ratio (OR): 0.63, 95% CI: 0.46 - 0.86) for circular stapled vs. handsewn anastomosis. However, subgroup analysis by anastomosis site suggested that this effect was predominantly present in neck anastomoses, with AL/CN rates of 23.2% vs. 14.6% vs 5.9% for handsewn vs. linear stapled anastomoses vs circular stapled, compared to 13.7% vs. 13.8% vs 12.2% in chest anastomoses.

Conclusions

Handsewn anastomoses appear to be associated with higher rates of anastomotic failure for anastomoses in the neck. However, anastomotic failure rates in the chest were similar across techniques and there was no significant difference on multivariable analysis. Further research into standardization of approach and techniques may further improve outcomes.