Transthoracic Esophagectomy: Hand-sewn Versus Side-to-side Linear-stapled Versus Circular-stapled Anastomosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

被引:6
作者
Schlottmann, Francisco [1 ,2 ]
Angeramo, Cristian A. [1 ]
Bras Harriott, Camila [1 ]
Casas, Maria A. [1 ]
Herbella, Fernando A. M. [3 ]
Patti, Marco G. [4 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Aleman Buenos Aires, Dept Surg, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[2] Univ Illinois, Dept Surg, Chicago, IL 60680 USA
[3] Escola Paulista Med, Dept Surg, Sao Paulo, Brazil
[4] Univ Virginia, Dept Surg, Charlottesville, VA USA
关键词
transthoracic esophagectomy; hand-sewn anastomosis; stapled linear anastomosis; circular anastomosis; anastomotic leak; IVOR-LEWIS ESOPHAGECTOMY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE ESOPHAGECTOMY; SQUAMOUS-CELL CARCINOMA; LONG-TERM SURVIVAL; ESOPHAGOGASTRIC ANASTOMOSIS; PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES; INITIAL-EXPERIENCE; GASTRIC TUBE; NEOADJUVANT CHEMORADIATION; SUBTOTAL ESOPHAGECTOMY;
D O I
10.1097/SLE.0000000000001050
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Three anastomotic techniques are mostly used to create an esophagogastric anastomosis in a transthoracic esophagectomy: hand-sewn (HS), side-to-side linear-stapled (SSLS), and circular-stapled (CS). The aim of this study was to compare surgical outcomes after HS, SSLS, and CS intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis. Materials and Methods: A systematic review using the MEDLINE database was performed to identify original articles analyzing outcomes after HS, SSLS, and CS esophagogastric anastomosis. The main outcome was an anastomotic leakage rate. Secondary outcomes included overall morbidity, major morbidity, and mortality. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each anastomotic technique on the different outcomes. Results: A total of 101 studies comprising 12,595 patients were included; 8835 (70.1%) with CS, 2532 (20.1%) with HS, and 1228 (9.8%) with SSLS anastomosis. Anastomotic leak occurred in 10% [95% confidence interval (CI), 6%-15%], 9% (95% CI, 6%-13%), and 6% (95% CI, 5%-7%) of patients after HS, SSLS, and CS anastomosis, respectively. Risk of anastomotic leakage was significantly higher with HS anastomosis (odds ratio=1.73, 95% CI: 1.47-2.03, P<0.0001) and SSLS (odds ratio=1.68, 95% CI: 1.36-2.08, P<0.0001), as compared with CS. Overall morbidity (HS: 52% vs. SLSS: 39% vs. CS: 35%) and major morbidity (HS: 33% vs. CS: 19%) rates were significantly lower with CS anastomosis. Mortality rate was 4% (95% CI, 3%-6%), 2% (95% CI, 2%-3%), and 3% (95% CI, 3%-4%) after HS, SSLS, and CS anastomosis, respectively. Conclusion: HS and SSLS intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomoses are associated with significantly higher rates of an anastomotic leak than CS anastomosis.
引用
收藏
页码:380 / 392
页数:13
相关论文
共 126 条
[31]   Early complications after Ivor Lewis subtotal esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy: Risk factors and management [J].
Griffin, SM ;
Shaw, IH ;
Dresner, SM .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 2002, 194 (03) :285-297
[32]   Totally minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy with single-utility incision video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for treatment of mid-lower esophageal cancer [J].
Guo, W. ;
Ma, L. ;
Zhang, Y. ;
Ma, X. ;
Yang, S. ;
Zhu, X. ;
Zhang, J. ;
Zhang, Y. ;
Xiang, J. ;
Li, H. .
DISEASES OF THE ESOPHAGUS, 2016, 29 (02) :139-145
[33]   Perioperative outcomes after transition from conventional to minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in a specialized center [J].
Hamouda, Ahmed H. ;
Forshaw, Matthew J. ;
Tsigritis, Kostas ;
Jones, Greg E. ;
Noorani, Aliya S. ;
Rohatgi, Ash ;
Botha, Abraham J. .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2010, 24 (04) :865-869
[34]   Anastomotic leak and stricture after hand-sewn versus linear-stapled intrathoracic oesophagogastric anastomosis: single-centre analysis of 415 oesophagectomies [J].
Harustiak, Tomas ;
Pazdro, Alexandr ;
Snajdauf, Martin ;
Stolz, Alan ;
Lischke, Robert .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIO-THORACIC SURGERY, 2016, 49 (06) :1650-1659
[35]   The original Ivor Lewis two stage esophagectomy revisited in the era of minimally invasive surgery [J].
Hawasli, A. ;
Camero, L. ;
Williams, T. ;
Ambrosi, G. ;
Sahly, M. ;
Demos, D. ;
Harrington, S. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2019, 217 (03) :454-457
[36]   Defining the Learning Curve for Robotic-assisted Esophagogastrectomy [J].
Hernandez, Jonathan M. ;
Dimou, Francesca ;
Weber, Jill ;
Almhanna, Khaldoun ;
Hoffe, Sarah ;
Shridhar, Ravi ;
Karl, Richard ;
Meredith, Kenneth .
JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2013, 17 (08) :1346-1351
[37]   Laparoscopic ischemic conditioning of the stomach for esophageal replacement [J].
Hoelscher, Arnulf H. ;
Schneider, Paul M. ;
Gutschow, Christian ;
Schroeder, Wolfgang .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2007, 245 (02) :241-246
[38]   Trends in esophageal adenocarcinoma incidence and mortality [J].
Hur, Chin ;
Miller, Melecia ;
Kong, Chung Yin ;
Dowling, Emily C. ;
Nattinger, Kevin J. ;
Dunn, Michelle ;
Feuer, Eric J. .
CANCER, 2013, 119 (06) :1149-1158
[39]   Thoracoscopic side-to-side esophagogastrostomy by use of linear stapler-a simplified technique facilitating a minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis operation [J].
Irino, Tomoyuki ;
Tsai, Jon A. ;
Ericson, Jessica ;
Nilsson, Magnus ;
Lundell, Lars ;
Rouvelas, Ioannis .
LANGENBECKS ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 2016, 401 (03) :315-322
[40]   An Early Experience Using the Technique of Transoral OrVil EEA Stapler for Minimally Invasive Transthoracic Esophagectomy [J].
Jaroszewski, Dawn E. ;
Williams, Dustin G. ;
Fleischer, David E. ;
Ross, Helen J. ;
Romero, Yvonne ;
Harold, Kristi L. .
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2011, 92 (05) :1862-1869