食管癌患者食管-管状胃环形吻合器端侧吻合与半器械侧侧吻合近期治疗效果观察

目的观察食管癌患者食管-管状胃环形吻合器端侧吻合与半器械侧侧吻合术后近期治疗效果。方法回顾性分析66例手术治疗食管癌患者的临床资料。30例采用食管-管状胃颈部半器械侧侧吻合术,36例采用食管-管状胃胸内环形吻合器端侧吻合术,比较两种吻合术后近期吻合口瘘、吻合口狭窄、反流性食管炎的发生率。结果半器械侧侧吻合术食管狭窄和反流性食管炎的发生率分别为3.3%(1/30例)和20.0%(6/30例),均低于环形吻合器吻合术的25.0%(9/36例)和61.1%(22/36例),两组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05);半器械侧侧吻合和环形吻合器吻合术后吻合口狭窄发生率分别为3.3%(1/30例)和5.6%(2/36例),两组比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论食管一管状胃半器械侧侧吻合与形吻合器端侧吻合比较,术后近期吻合口狭窄及反流性食管炎发生率较低。     

吻合口胃侧荷包缝合在食管胃胸内器械吻合术中的应用

目的 探讨吻合口胃侧荷包缝合在食管胃胸内器械吻合术中的安全性和有效性.方法 回顾性分析2008年1月至2011年12月四川省人民医院收治的行食管胃胸内器械吻合术治疗的238例胸段食管癌和24例食管胃结合部癌患者的临床资料,其中122例吻合口按常规方法处理(常规组),140例改进了处理方法,吻合前在吻合口胃侧吻合器中心杆处予以1号丝线作浆肌层荷包缝合并结扎(改进组),比较两组患者吻合口瘘和吻合口狭窄发生率等临床指标.计量资料比较采用￡检验,计数资料比较采用x2检验或者Fisher确切概率法.结果 两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后24 h胸腔积液引流量、术后住院时间和术后pTNM分期比较,差异无统计学意义(t=0.410,0.798,0.634,0.362,x2=0.605,P＞0.05);两组患者吻合器使用类型、吻合口位置、吻合器食管端组织质量比较,差异无统计学意义(x2 =0.118,0.221,t=0.459,P＞0.05);两组患者术后肺部并发症、心律失常等并发症的发生率以及病死率比较,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);但改进组吻合器胃端组织质量大于常规组,差异有统计学意义(t=13.856,P＜0.05);改进组术后吻合口瘘、吻合口狭窄的发生率均低于常规组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 吻合口胃侧荷包缝合操作简单、安全,不延长手术时间和住院时间,可以有效减少食管胃胸内器械吻合术后吻合口瘘和吻合口狭窄的发生.     

手工与吻合器行食管胃吻合术后胃食管反流症状的临床观察

目的 通过临床观察应用手工和吻合器行主动脉弓下食管胃吻合术后的胃食管反流症状的发生率和程度,以指导选择一种合理的吻合方法.方法 全组30例,分成手工组(17例)和吻合器组(13例),观察从开始进食到进食后1个月胃食管反流的发生率和程度.结果 手工组有4例术后出现胃食管反流(23.5%),无严重反流病例;吻合器组11例(84.6%)术后出现胃食管反流,重度反流4例.全组无吻合口瘘、狭窄,无术后死亡.结论 食管胃黏膜管套叠吻合比吻合器吻合在术后抗反流上有优势,在进行主动脉弓下食管胃吻合时应尽量选择具有良好抗反流效果的吻合方法.     

消化道吻合器在颈部胃食管吻合中的应用

目的 总结食管癌切除后采用消化道吻合器行颈部胃食管吻合术治疗食管癌患者的临床经验,以降低术后吻合口瘘和吻合口狭窄的发生率,提高手术疗效.方法 125例食管癌患者,根据采用的手术术式不同分为两组,器械吻合组:行食管癌切除后采用国产常州WGWB-26型吻合器进行颈部胃食管吻合;手工吻合组,行食管癌切除后采用手工方法进行颈部胃食管吻合.比较两种手术术式的胃食管吻合时间、术后吻合口瘘和吻合口狭窄的发生率.结果 全组无手术死亡.器械吻合组吻合时间少于手工吻合组(30±5min vs.55±5 min, P＜0.05),近期吻合口瘘和吻合口狭窄发生率明显低于手工吻合组(0% vs.4.8%, 0% vs.9.5%,P＜0.05);器械吻合组随访1～15个月食管X线钡餐检查证实无吻合口狭窄.结论 使用吻合器行胃食管器械吻合,能增加吻合的可靠性,减少术后并发症,包括吻合口瘘和吻合口狭窄的发生.     

胃次全切除后残胃-空肠端侧器械吻合的临床和实验研究

目的 总结胃次全切除后采用弧形切割吻合器行残胃-空肠端侧吻合的临床和实验体会.方法 Beagle犬12条,随机分成A、B两组,在胃窦切除后分别以器械或手工行残胃-十二指肠端侧吻合术;3个月后,以器械行残胃-十二指肠侧侧吻合术;测量残胃十二指肠侧侧吻合处及邻近的十二指肠周长,并观察残胃-空肠端侧吻合口直径及愈合情况.选择145例远端胃癌患者,随机分成A、B两组:A组71例,B组74例.胃次全切除后,分别以器械或手工行残胃-空肠端侧吻合术,手术后观察吻合口瘘、狭窄等并发症;1年后行上消化道造影,观察吻合口钡剂通过和2 h后残胃钡剂残留情况.结果 12条Beagle犬术后均恢复良好,残胃十二指肠侧侧吻合处及邻近的十二指肠周长分别是(6.46±0.06)cm和(7.26±0.12)am;残胃空肠端侧吻合口及小弯侧三角处愈合均良好,A、B两组吻合口直径分别为(1.18±0.13)cm和(1.20±0.09)cm;两组比较差异无统计学意义(t=0.255,P=0.804).145例患者均顺利完成手术,术后未出现吻合口瘘、狭窄等并发症;术后1年,两组分别行上消化道稀钡造影,均显示吻合口无明显狭窄,钡剂通过顺利,2 h后残胃仅见少量钡剂残留.结论 胃次全切除后应用器械行残胃-空肠端侧吻合能够在残胃的原位完成消化道重建,降低吻合难度,确保足够的胃切除,避免撕裂脾脏和脾周血管.     

食管胃侧侧吻合在食管癌颈部吻合中的应用

目的探讨食管癌颈部吻合术中应用直线切割闭合器行食管胃侧-侧吻合对减少术后吻合口瘘及吻合口狭窄效果。方法自2014-01—2015-02间应用直线切割闭合器行食管胃吻合口后壁侧-侧吻合,吻合口前壁间断缝合完成食管胃颈部吻合53例,术后随访患者进食、反流情况,并行纤维胃镜、造影检查评估吻合口内径,并对其临床资料进行回顾性分析。结果 53例均顺利完成食管胃颈部吻合,其中胸上段食管癌22例、胸中段食管癌31例。手术径路分为左开胸二切口37例,右开胸三切口6例,胸腔镜10例。术后病理分期:Ⅰ期7例,ⅡA期13例,ⅡB期22例,Ⅲ期11例。术后发生吻合口瘘2例(3.7%),经禁食水,局部换药,胃肠内及胃肠外营养10 d后愈合。全部病例切缘均无癌残留,术后随访3~24个月,行上消化道造影及胃镜检查,吻合口直径(1.4±0.02)cm,所有患者进食顺利,无吻合口狭窄。结论应用直线型缝合器行颈部侧侧吻合,可有效防止术后吻合口瘘及吻合口狭窄发生。     

食管胃侧侧吻合对术后并发症影响的系统评价与Meta分析

目的系统评价侧侧吻合与传统吻合方式(端侧吻合、端端吻合)对食管胃吻合术后吻合口并发症的影响。方法计算机检索Pub Med、EMbase、The Cochrane Library(2015年第4期)、Web of Science、CBM、CNKI、VIP和万方数据库,检索时限均为各数据库建库至2015年4月30日,收集侧侧吻合与传统吻合(端侧吻合、端端吻合)对食管胃吻合术后吻合口并发症的影响相关的随机对照试验(RCT),按照纳入排除标准筛选文献,对符合标准的RCT由2位研究者独立进行资料提取和质量评价后,采用Rev Man 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果纳入7个RCT,共684例患者。纳入研究均存在较大偏倚风险。Meta分析结果显示:与传统吻合方式(端侧吻合、端端吻合)相比,侧侧吻合降低了术后吻合口狭窄发生率[RR=0.20,95%CI(0.11,0.36),P0.000 01],但在术后吻合口瘘发生率[RR=0.71,95%CI(0.43,1.19),P=0.19]和胃食管反流发生率[RR=0.74,95%CI(0.50,1.11),P=0.15]方面,二者差异无统计学意义。结论与传统食管胃吻合方式(端侧吻合、端端吻合)相比较,侧侧吻合可以降低吻合口狭窄发生率,但对食管胃吻合术后吻合口瘘及及胃食管反流的发生率无显著影响。     

食管癌切除后食管胃颈部侧-侧吻合的近期疗效

目的 评价食管癌切除后食管胃颈部侧-侧吻合的近期疗效.方法 回顾性分析2006年1月至2009年3月第三军医大学大坪医院野战外科研究所收治的105例接受手术治疗的食管癌患者的临床资料.全组患者在全麻下行食管癌切除术,其中97例行食管胃颈部侧-侧吻合,8例行食管胃颈部手工端-端吻合.从行食管胃颈部侧-侧吻合的患者中选取9例与行食管胃颈部手工端-端吻合的患者进行比较,采用t检验分析两种吻合方式的术后咽食管功能.结果 97例行食管胃颈部侧-侧吻合的患者无手术死亡,吻合时间为15～30 min,平均为(21±3)min.16例患者术后出现并发症,其中肺部并发症7例,经抗感染和对症支持治疗后痊愈;声带麻痹4例,其中2例于术后3个月内恢复,2例为喉返神经损伤所致永久性声带麻痹,但无需进一步处理;吻合口漏3例,经更换敷料痊愈;吻合口狭窄2例,经扩张1～2次痊愈.术后咽食管功能:行食管胃颈部侧-侧吻合患者的吻合口直径为(3.01±0.17)cm,而行食管胃颈部手工端-端吻合患者为(1.69±0.26)cm,两者比较,差异有统计学意义(t=2.093,P＜0.05);2例行食管胃颈郎侧-侧吻合及4例行食管胃颈部手工端-端吻合的患者主诉有吞咽困难.结论 食管胃颈部侧-侧吻合是简单、安全、有效的吻合方法,吻合区的功能明显优于食管胃颈郎手工端-端吻合.     

机械吻合与食管胃分层吻合术治疗食管和贲门癌的对比研究

目的比较机械吻合术与分层吻合术在预防食管和贲门癌手术后吻合口瘘、吻合口狭窄和食管反流并发症发生率的差异。方法将316例食管和贲门癌患者按入院顺序随机分为机械吻合组(162例,采用食管癌切除机械吻合术)和分层吻合组(154例,采用食管癌切除食管胃分层吻合术)。分别比较两组术后吻合口瘘、吻合口狭窄和食管反流并发症发生率。结果机械吻合组术后吻合口瘘和吻合口狭窄发生率分别为1.2%和2.0%,而分层吻合组则分别为3.9%和4.7%,两组比较P<0.01。两组胃食管反流的发生率(88.8%、89.3%)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论对于预防食管和贲门癌手术后吻合口瘘、吻合口狭窄方面,机械吻合优于分层吻合法。     

胃次全切除后圆形吻合器完成残胃-空肠端侧吻合的实验与临床应用研究

目的探讨胃次全切除后采用圆形吻合器行残胃．空肠端侧吻合的实验与临床可行性。方法Beagle＇s犬12条，随机分成A、B两组，在胃窦切除后分别以器械或手工行残胃-十二指肠端侧吻合术。3个月后，以器械行残胃-十二指肠侧侧吻合术。测量残胃十二指肠侧侧吻合处及邻近的十二指肠周长；并观察残胃空肠端侧吻合口直径及愈合情况。选择163例远端胃癌患者，随机分成C、D两组，C组89例，D组74例。胃次全切除后，分别以器械或手工行残胃-空肠端侧吻合术，手术后观察吻合口漏、狭窄等并发症，1年后行稀钡上消化道造影，观察吻合口钡剂通过和2h后残胃钡剂残留情况。结果手术后12条Beagle＇s犬术后均恢复良好，残胃十二指肠侧侧吻合处及邻近的十二指肠周长分别是（6．46±0．06）cm，（7．26±0．12）cm。残胃空肠端侧吻合口及小弯侧三角处愈合均良好，A、B两组吻合口直径分别为（1．18±0．13）cm和（1．20±0．09）cm。两组比较差异无显著性意义（t=0．255，P=0．804）。163例患者均顺利完成手术，术后未出现吻合口漏、狭窄等并发症，术后1年，2组分别行上消化道稀钡造影，均显示吻合口无明显狭窄，钡剂通过顺利，2h后残胃仅见少量钡剂残留。结论胃次全切除后应用器械行残胃-空肠端侧吻合能够在残胃的原位完成消化道重建，降低吻合难度，方法可行。     

A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of Semi-mechanical versus Hand-sewn or Circular Stapled Esophagogastrostomy for Prevention of Anastomotic Stricture

Background

Successful anastomosis is essential in esophagogastrectomy, and the application of the circular stapler effectively reduces the anastomotic leakage, although stricture formation has become more frequent. The present study, a randomized controlled trial, compared the recently developed semi-mechanical anastomosis with a hand-sewn or circular stapled esophagogastrostomy in prevention of anastomotic stricture.

Methods

Between November 2007 and September 2008, 160 consecutive patients with esophageal carcinoma underwent surgical treatment our department. Five patients were excluded from this study, and the remaining 155 patients were completely randomized to receive either an everted plus side extension esophagogastrostomy (semi-mechanical [SM] group) or a conventional hand-sewn esophagogastric anastomosis ([HS] group) or a circular stapled ([CS] group) esophagogastric anastomosis, after dissection of the esophageal tumor and construction of a tubular stomach. The primary outcome was the incidence of an anastomotic stricture at 3 months after the operation (defined as the diameter of the anastomotic orifice ≤0.8 cm on esophagogram). Secondary outcomes were the dysphagia score and reflux score, as well as the anastomotic diameter.

Results

The anastomotic stricture rate was 0 % (0/45) in the SM group, 9.6 % (5/52) in the HS group, and 19.1 % (9/47) in the CS group (p < 0.001). The mean diameter of the anastomotic orifice was 18.2 ± 4.7 mm in the SM group, 11.5 ± 2.4 mm in the HS group, and 9.5 ± 3.0 mm in the CS group (p < 0.001). The reflux/regurgitation score among the three groups was similar.

Conclusions

Semi-mechanical esophagogastric anastomosis could prevent stricture formation more effectively than hand-sewn or circular stapler esophagogastrostomy, without increasing gastroesophageal reflux.     

Eliminating the cervical esophagogastric anastomotic leak with a side-to-side stapled anastomosis

BACKGROUND: Although the acute postoperative complications of a cervical esophagogastric anastomosis are less than those with an intrathoracic esophageal anastomosis, the long-term sequelae of a cervical anastomotic leak are not as minor as initially reported. Nearly 50% of cervical anastomotic leaks result in an anastomotic stricture, and the subsequent need for chronic dilatations negates the merits of an operation intended to restore comfortable swallowing. OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to determine whether construction of a side-to-side stapled cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after transhiatal esophagectomy could reliably eliminate the majority of anastomotic leaks. METHODS: In 114 consecutive patients undergoing transhiatal esophagectomy, a functional side-to-side cervical esophagogastric anastomosis was constructed with the Auto Suture Endo-GIA II stapler (United States Surgical Corporation, Auto Suture Company Division, Norwalk, Conn) applied directly through the cervical wound. This side-to-side stapled anastomosis has 3 rows of staples. Early postoperative anastomotic morbidity, subsequent need for anastomotic dilatations, and patient satisfaction with swallowing were evaluated. RESULTS: Before the side-to-side stapled anastomosis, the incidence of cervical esophagogastric anastomosis leak in over 1000 patients undergoing transhiatal esophagectomy having a manually sewn anastomosis varied from 10% to 15%. Among the 111 survivors of transhiatal esophagectomy and a side-to-side stapled anastomosis, there were 3 (2.7%) clinically significant anastomotic leaks. This lowered incidence of leaks has contributed to reduction in the average length of stay after an uncomplicated transhiatal esophagectomy to 7 days and has provided more comfortable swallowing, ease of subsequent esophageal dilatations, and greater patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Construction of the cervical esophagogastric anastomosis with a side-to-side stapled anastomosis greatly reduces the frequency of anastomotic leaks and later strictures. The side-to-side stapled anastomosis is a major technical advance in the progression of refinements of transhiatal esophagectomy and a cervical esophagogastric anastomosis.     

Clinical Application of Mucosal Valve Technique for Anastomosis During Esophagogastrostomy

Background

The study aims to compare the efficacy in prevention of anastomotic complications using layer-to-layer mucosal valve technique versus circular stapled technique for esophagogastric intrathoracic anastomosis after resection for esophageal and gastric cardiac carcinoma.

Methods

From January 2005 to December 2010, 136 patients received layer-to-layer mucosal valve technique (LM group), 219 received circular stapled anastomosis (CS group) after curative intent resection for esophageal and gastric cardiac carcinoma. The technique details were reported and the clinical results were analyzed.

Results

The two groups were comparable on clinical baseline characteristics. The average duration of operation was longer with LM technique by 16 min, but without statistical significance (P?=?0.073). There was no anastomotic leakage in the LM group, while in the CS group, leakage occurred in seven patients (3.2 %, P?=?0.047). Both the incidence and grade of postoperative dysphagia were significantly lower in the LM group (P?<?0.05). Significantly fewer patients experienced stricture after LM technique (3.8 %) compared with CS anastomosis (18.2 %, P?<?0.001). CS anastomosis was associated with a significantly higher incidence of persistent stricture requiring more dilatation (P?<?0.001). Symptoms of reflux were better controlled by LM technique; 82.7 % of patients were asymptomatic with respect to reflux compared to 58.9 % in the CS group, P?<?0.001. And there was a significant reduction in the incidence of esophagitis in remnant esophagus in the LM group (P?=?0.001).

Conclusions

The layered mucosal valve anastomosis could significantly diminish the incidence of anastomotic complications and could be used as an alternative for esophagogastric anastomosis after resection of esophageal and gastric cardiac carcinoma.     

食管胃套接术与器械吻合术治疗食管、贲门癌的对比研究

目的对比食管胃套接术与器械吻合术的临床治疗效果,以减少食管、贲门癌根治术后并发症的发生率. 方法将285例诊断明确的食管、贲门癌住院患者按入院顺序随机分为两组,食管胃套接组(套接组)134例,采用食管癌切除食管瓣片成形-食管胃套接术;器械吻合组(吻合组)151例,采用食管癌切除器械吻合术.术后观察吻合口瘘、吻合口狭窄和胃食管反流并发症的发生率,并随访观察3年. 结果套接组术后吻合口瘘、吻合口狭窄和胃食管反流的发生率分别为0%、2.2%和1.5%,而吻合组为1.3%、13.9%和21.2%(P<0.01). 结论食管瓣片成形-食管胃套接术术后并发症少、操作简单,较器械吻合具有一定的优越性.     

Comparison of hand-sewn and stapled esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal resection for cancer: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the hand-sewn and stapled methods in esophagogastric anastomosis. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: After esophageal resection for cancer, the relative merits of the hand-sewn and the stapled methods of esophagogastric anastomosis, especially regarding leakage and stricture rates, have not adequately been studied. METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial was undertaken in 122 patients with squamous cell cancer of the thoracic esophagus who underwent a Lewis-Tanner esophagectomy. Patients were stratified according to esophageal size, based on the diameter of the divided esophagus (< or > or = 30 mm) and then were randomized to have either a hand-sewn or a stapled anastomosis. RESULTS: The mean total operating times (standard error of the mean) when the hand-sewn and the stapled methods were used were 214 (4) minutes and 217 (3.4) minutes, respectively (p = not significant [NS]). The respective in vivo proximal resection margins (standard error of the mean) were 8 (0.4) cm and 7.6 (0.4) cm (p = NS). Leakage rates were 1.6% and 4.9% (p = NS). Excluding hospital deaths, patients with leakage or anastomotic recurrence, and those who received radiation therapy to histologically infiltrated resection margin, anastomotic stricture was found in 5 (9.1%) of 55 patients in the hand-sewn group and 20 (40%) of 50 in the stapler group (p = 0.0003). The difference in stricture rates was significant in small as well as large esophagi. Anastomotic recurrence developed in only one patient in each group. CONCLUSIONS: The authors conclude that both methods were safe, but the stapled technique resulted in more stricture formation.     

全腔镜食管癌三野根治术颈部机械吻合与手工吻合的应用比较

目的：评估全腔镜食管癌三野根治术食管胃颈部吻合方式（机械或手工）对术后吻合口相关并发症发生的影响。方法回顾性分析2010年1月至2013年11月间在福建省肿瘤医院胸外科接受全腔镜食管癌三野根治术治疗的203例食管癌患者的临床资料。根据颈部吻合方式的不同,分为机械吻合组（104例）和手工吻合组（99例）。比较两组患者术后吻合口相关并发症发生率。结果机械吻合组术中吻合时间较手工吻合组明显缩短[（15．5±5．0） min比（28．0±4．5） min,P＜0．01]。两组术后吻合口瘘发生率分别为5．8％（6/104）和3．0％（3/99）,差异无统计学意义（P＞0．05）;吻合口狭窄发生率分别为9．6％（10/104）和2．0％（2/99）,差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05）。结论与手工吻合相比,全腔镜食管癌三野根治术食管胃颈部机械吻合操作简单、吻合确切,但吻合口狭窄的风险增加,因此,在临床实践中,应结合患者的具体情况合理选择吻合方式。     

Randomized Trial Comparing Side-to-Side Stapled and Hand-Sewn Esophagogastric Anastomosis in Neck

Background

Leak from cervical esophagogastric anastomosis (CEGA) following esophagectomy is associated with morbidity and poor functional outcome. To address this issue, we conducted a randomized trial comparing ??hand-sewn?? with ??stapled side-to-side?? CEGA.

Methods

Of 174 patients who underwent esophageal resection and CEGA between 2004 and 2010, 87 each were randomized to ??hand-sewn?? and ??stapled side-to-side?? CEGA [www.Clinical Trials.gov: NCT00497549]. The primary outcome measure was anastomotic leak rate. The secondary outcome measures included CEGA construction time and occurrence of anastomotic stricture during follow up.

Results

The overall anastomotic leak rate was 17.2?% (major leaks: 8?%). The leak rate was similar among the two groups (hand-sewn: 14/87, stapled: 16/87; p?=?0.33). The stapled anastomotic technique was faster (25?±?6.5?min vs. 27?±?5.5?min; p?=?0.02). The overall operative mortality and morbidity rates were 6.3?% and 40.8?%, respectively. At a median follow up of 12 (6?C42) months, anastomotic stricture occurred in 24 (14.7?%) patients and was significantly more common in the ??hand-sewn?? group (17/82 vs. 7/81; p?=?0.045).

Conclusion

There were no differences in the leak rates and postoperative outcome between the two CEGA techniques. At follow up, anastomotic strictures occurred less frequently following stapled CEGA. The ideal CEGA technique remains elusive.     

Comparison of manual and mechanical cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal resection for squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Objective: The use of a circular stapler in cervical esophagogastric anastomosis remains controversial. This study was to compare the postoperative and long-term results of manual and mechanical techniques for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after resection for squamous cell carcinoma. Methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial was undertaken in 63 patients with curatively resectable squamous cell cancer of the thoracic esophagus between 1996 and 1999. Patients were randomized to receive either a hand-sewn (32 patients) or circular stapled (31 patients) cervical esophagogastric anastomosis. Results: The mean operating time was longer when the hand-sewn method was used (524 vs. 447 min, P<0.001). Anastomotic leakage was noted in seven patients (22%) in the hand-sewn group and eight patients (26%) in the stapler group (P=NS). Hospital mortality occurred in four patients (13%) of the hand-sewn group and in three patients (10%) of the stapler group (P=NS). After the operation, four patients (14%) in the hand-sewn group and five patients (18%) in the stapler group developed a benign esophageal stricture (P=NS). The mean follow-up time was 24 months, and the rates of freedom from benign stricture and survival were comparable in each group. Conclusions: Performing cervical esophagogastric anastomoses using a circular mechanical stapler had a shorter operating time and a comparable outcome to the hand-sewn method. The circular mechanical stapler could be used as an alternative for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after resection for esophageal squamous cell cancer.     

Does esophagogastric anastomotic technique influence the outcome of patients with esophageal cancer?

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the outcome of patients with esophageal cancer who had either modified Collard or standard hand-sewn cervical esophagogastric anastomoses in reconstruction during esophagectomy. METHODS: From March of 1996 to October of 2002, 274 patients with esophageal cancer underwent esophagectomy with gastric replacement and cervical esophagogastric anastomosis. Beginning in March of 2001, a modified Collard technique (stapled) was used in most patients (n = 86) for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis; a standard hand-sewn technique (sewn) was used in all others (n = 188). Using a propensity score based on 8 variables (age, gender, race, surgeon, surgical approach, pathologic stage, histologic cell type, and induction chemoradiotherapy), 85 patient pairs were matched and followed for time-related events. Outcome comparisons included cervical wound infection, cervical anastomotic leak, other hospital complications, length of stay, anastomotic dilatation, reflux symptoms, and survival. RESULTS: At 30 days, freedom from cervical wound infection was 92% for stapled versus 71% for sewn anastomoses ( P = .001), and freedom from cervical anastomotic leak was 96% versus 89% ( P = .09), respectively. Other hospital complications occurred in 58% and 49%, respectively ( P = .17). Median length of stay was 10 days for both ( P = .3). At 2 years, freedom from anastomotic dilatation was 34% for stapled versus 10% for sewn anastomoses ( P < .0001), and the mean number of dilatations per patient was 2.4 versus 4.1 ( P = .0001), respectively. Reflux was rare for both. Thirty-day, 6-month, and 24-month survivals were 98%, 91%, and 77% for stapled anastomoses and 98%, 88%, and 69% for sewn anastomoses ( P = .3). CONCLUSIONS: The modified Collard anastomotic technique dramatically reduces morbidity after esophagectomy. It should replace hand-sewn esophagogastric anastomoses.     

Esophagogastrectomy: The influence of stapled versus hand-sewn anastomosis on outcome

Successful anastomosis is essential for favorable esophagogastrectomy outcomes. Before July 2002, almost all esophagogastric anastomoses at our institution were hand-sewn. We then began using linear stapled anastomotic techniques. This review compares patient outcomes with both techniques. From July 2001 to June 2004, 280 consecutive esophagogastrectomy patients (235 men and 45 women) were reviewed (median age, 65 years). The anastomosis was intrathoracic in 206 patients (74%) and cervical in 74 (26%). Anastomoses were hand-sewn in 205 patients (73%) and linear stapled in 75 (27%). Stapled anastomoses were intrathoracic in 33 patients (16%) and cervical in 42 (57%). Anastomotic leaks occurred in 30 patients (11%); 26 (12.7%) in the hand-sewn and 4 (5.3%) in the linear stapled group (P = .008). Leaks were asymptomatic in 17 patients (57%). Dilatation was required in 70 hand-sewn anastomoses (34%) and in 11 stapled (14.6%) (P = .001). Hand-sewn anastomoses were more likely to leak and require dilatation; odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were 5.35 (1.67–19.27) and 3.58 (1.66–8.34), respectively. A linear stapled anastomosis is safe and associated with both a significantly lower leak rate and the need for dilatation compared with hand-sewn anastomosis. This nonrandomized series suggests that linear stapled anastomosis is the preferred technique regardless of anastomotic location. Presented at the Forty-Sixth Annual Meeting of The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, Chicago, Illinois, May 14–18, 2005 (oral presentation).