Comparison of free jejunal graft with gastric pull-up reconstruction after resection of hypopharyngeal and cervical esophageal carcinoma

SUMMARY.  The purpose of this study is to evaluate the operative outcomes of a gastric pull-up and free jejunal graft reconstruction after resection of hypopharyngeal and cervical esophageal carcinoma. Records of all patients who underwent esophageal resection for carcinoma of the hypopharynx and cervical esophagus were reviewed. Reconstruction after esophagectomy was performed using the gastric pull-up ( n  = 38) or free jejunal graft ( n  = 14) techniques. The hypopharynx was the most common primary tumor site for the free jejunal graft group, whereas the gastric pull-up group had lesions more frequently in the cervical esophagus ( P  < 0.05). Both operative time and blood loss in the gastric pull-up group were significantly longer and excessive than those of the free jejunal graft group ( P  < 0.05). The graft survival rate was 95% (32/34) in the gastric pull-up group and 93% (13/14) for the free jejunal transfer group. The overall leakage rate was 1.9% (1/52). Three patients died (6%) in the postoperative period. There was no significant difference with regard to operative morbidity and mortality between the gastric pull-up group and free jejunal graft group. In conclusion, both free jejunal graft and gastric pull-up are safe and effective methods for the immediate restoration of alimentary continuity.     

Clinical outcome of jejunal pouch double-tract reconstruction after total gastrectomy

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The importance of the duodenal passage and the need for pouch reconstruction after total gastrectomy are matters of controversy. METHODOLOGY: Twenty consecutive patients with early gastric cancer were studied 20who underwent jejunal pouch double-tract (JPD) reconstruction after total gastrectomy. Nutritional variables were examined for > or =10 years postoperatively. RESULTS: The mean operation time was 204 minutes. There was no anastomotic leakage and no hospital mortality. Anastomotic stenosis between the esophagus and a jejunal pouch developed in 2 patients (10%), and reflux esophagitis was observed in 4 (20%). Symptoms were controlled by conserva tive treatment within 3 years after surgery. Body mass indices in all patients were significantly decreased from 1 month (p<0.05) to 10 years (p<0.005) after the operation. The mean body weight decrease occurring during the first to the tenth postoperative year was 12.7% overall, but 17.8% and 9.1% in patients aged > or =60 years and <60 years, respectively. The body weight decreases from 3 (p<0.05) to 6 (p<0.01), and at 9 years (p<0.01) were significantly lower before 60 years of age than after. CONCLUSIONS: JPD reconstruction facilitates long-term recovery of body weight after total gastrectomy and should be considered before the aged of 60.     

Modification of the procedure for esophageal reconstruction after resection of esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Reconstruction after esophagectomy is still associated with the highest risk of anastomotic leakage among all of the gastrointestinal anastomoses. In 1994, the reconstruction phase of our procedure was modified aiming to reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage. We evaluated usefulness of our modified procedure. METHODOLOGY: 32 patients before the modification of reconstruction were included in Group A, whereas Group B included 80 patients after the modification. In Group A, a thin gastric tube was constructed along the greater curvature. In Group B, the gastric tube was made thinner and longer. We were able to preserve a vessel feeding the terminal segment of the gastric tube that secured ample blood supply to this segment. The cut end of the cervical esophagus was anastomosed to the posterior wall of the gastric tube near the greater curvature, where adequate blood supply is available, and the anastomotic line was covered with omentum. RESULTS: In Group A, anastomotic leakage occurred in 15.6%. In Group B, minor leaks occurred 2.5%, indicating a marked decrease. CONCLUSIONS: The method of esophageal reconstruction currently performed at our department does not require special techniques, but the occurrence of anastomotic leakage is very low.     

New method for jejunal pouch interposition reconstruction after distal gastrectomy

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Recently pouch reconstruction has been reported to improve quality of life and functional results after surgery for gastric cancer. Although jejunal pouch reconstruction after distal gastrectomy has favorable results for patients' quality of life, it is complicated and takes a long time to complete. We developed a new technique using a linear stapling device to avoid this problem. METHODOLOGY: The duodenum and the jejunum are simultaneously divided with a 100-mm linear stapler 0.5 cm distal to the pyrolus ring and 20 cm distal to the ligament of Treitz, respectively. A 100-mm linear stapler is introduced into two approximated segments of the jejunum through two small stab wounds 10 cm and 15 cm distal to the stump, respectively, and side-to-side anastomosis is performed along the antimesenteric borders. The anterior wall of the pouch is cut along the prospective line of anastomosis with the gastric remnant. The anterior wall of the stomach is cut along the planned suture line having a length similar to that of the pouch. The posterior walls of the stomach and the jejunal pouch are placed back-to-back on the planned anastomotic line. End-to-end posterior anastomosis between the gastric remnant and the jejunal pouch is simultaneously performed with gastrectomy using a 100-mm linear stapler. End-to-end anterior anastomosis is created by hand. RESULTS: This technique has been used in 4 patients, and there have been no complications related to the pouch or anastomoses. Mean operative time was 255 +/- 37 min (range: 205-290 min). CONCLUSIONS: Shortening of operative time can be attributed to adoption of end-to-end posterior anastomosis between the stomach and the jejunal pouch using the linear stapling device simultaneously with gastrectomy.     

Anti-reflux pouch-esophagostomy after proximal gastrectomy with jejunal pouch interposition reconstruction

Reflux esophagitis is a serious postoperative complication for patients undergoing gastrectomy. We designed a new jejunal pouch-esophagostomy to prevent reflux after proximal gastrectomy. After proximal gastrectomy, ajejunal segment about 17 cm long was folded. Side-to-side jejuno-jejunostomy was made using a linear stapler with 100-mm staples along the length at the anti-mesenteric side. A 10-cm-longjejunal pouch with a 7-cm-long apical bridge was made. Esophago-jejuno end-to-side anastomosis (pouch-esophagostomy) was made with circular stapler at the right anterior wall the apical bridge. We add "partial posterior fundoplication" like wrapping using the apical bridge of the jejunal pouch. Patients with this new anti-reflux anastomosis showed no reflux on barium meal study even in the right anterior oblique deep Trendelenburg's position. Jejunal pouch reconstruction with partial posterior wrapping provides a satisfactory result with regard to preventing reflux esophagitis.     

New method of jejunal pouch reconstruction after selective vagotomy and antrectomy

Selective vagotomy and antrectomy (SV-A) is performed as a surgical treatment in patients with pyloric stenosis due to peptic ulcer. Since this method shows that the incidence of postoperative complaints is not low, various reconstruction methods have been evaluated to prevent the sequelae. However, there have been no definitely useful methods. A jejunal pouch reconstruction used for gastric cancer surgery has been performed to compensate for the disadvantages of SV-A in 7 patients with complicated gastric, duodenal ulcers at this study. A 10- to 15-cm-long pouch is interposed between the remnant stomach and the duodenum. The pouch is anastomosed to the duodenum using the double tract method. The median postoperative follow-up period was 61 months. No patients showed gastric stasis, ulcer recurrence, residual gastritis. We demonstrated the method of jejunal pouch double tract reconstruction after SV-A. This method was useful for preventing the sequelae after SV-A.     

Evaluation of reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy: prospective comparative study of jejunal interposition and jejunal pouch interposition

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To prevent various distresses after proximal gastrectomy, reconstruction by interposed jejunal pouch has been advocated as an organ-preserving surgical strategy to ensure favorable quality of life for the patients. METHODOLOGY: Proximal gastrectomy was performed in 9 patients with gastric cancer in the upper third of the stomach. Four patients were randomly selected for reconstruction by jejunal pouch interposition (JPI group), while 5 had reconstruction by jejunal interposition (JI group). The patients who underwent JPI and JI were followed up to evaluate resumption of normal diet, change in body weight, and clinical symptoms. RESULTS: The JPI group showed a significant dietary advantage. Three months after surgery, JPI patients could eat more than 80% of the volume of their preoperative meals, whereas JI patients ate less than 50%. The percentage of postoperative body weight loss was higher in the JI group than in the JPI group because the volume of the remnant stomach was more adequate in the latter. Moreover, it was easier to enter the remnant stomach and duodenum for endoscopic fiberscopy in the JPI group for the treatment of hepato-biliary pancreatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: JPI is an effective method for preservation of gastric function after proximal gastrectomy.     

Serious complications after a proximal gastrectomy with a jejunal pouch interposition for gastric cancer

Proximal gastrectomy with jejunal interposition is a common surgical method in Japan, because the procedure has been shown to give a better post-operative quality of life. Some complications are associated with it. However, esophageal candidiasis and linear marginal ulcer along the gastrojejunal anastomosis after the surgical method has never previously been reported. We herein report a case of a patient who developed serious complications after proximal gastrectomy with jejunal interposition. A 68-year-old man underwent proximal gastrectomy with a jejunal pouch interposition for reconstruction for type 1 gastric cancer. Twenty-three months after the procedure, he complained of dysphagia and epigastric pain. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy showed esophageal candidiasis. The patient improved symptomatically following antifungal medication with fluconazole. Eleven months later, the patient developed severe pneumonia. In subsequent days, a melena episode occurred. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy revealed a linear marginal ulcer along three-fourths of the gastrojejunal anastomosis. The ulcer was drug resistant. The patient died of respiratory failure. Jejunal pouch interposition after a proximal gastrectomy can be associated with significant complications. Further studies are required to identify the best condition of the procedure.     

Long-term follow-up of patients with jejunal pouch reconstruction after total gastrectomy. A randomized prospective study

BACKGROUND: Fifty-one patients were operated on during 1988-1992 and randomized after total gastrectomy to one of two reconstruction types. Twenty patients with jejunal pouch reconstruction and 14 patients with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (67% of all) survived at least 3 years after total gastrectomy. We studied symptoms, eating capacity, and nutrition in these patients during the clinical follow-up; 21 patients were assessed by mail questionnaire 8 years after total gastrectomy. METHODS: Postoperative symptoms, number of meals, and eating capacity were assessed by standard questionnaire during 3 years' follow-up. Weight loss and nutritional laboratory variables were measured, and upper intestinal endoscopy with biopsy was performed during the follow-up. Eight years after the operation symptoms, ability to eat, and number of meals consumed were studied by means of a mail questionnaire. RESULTS: Three years postoperatively dumping (64% compared with 10%, P < 0.05) and early satiety (86% compared with 5%, P < 0.05) were commoner in the Roux-en-Y group. In the pouch group eating capacity was better (96% of normal compared with 67%, P < 0.05), and the patients ate fewer meals per day (mean, 2.7 versus 5.3, P < 0.05) at 3 years. Mean weight loss at 3 years was 9.9 kg in the Roux-en-Y group compared with 1.5 kg in the pouch group (P < 0.05). 25 (OH) vitamin D concentration tended to be higher in the pouch group (47.3 nmol/l compared with 33.9 nmol/l). In the Roux-en-Y group serum alkaline phosphatase activity increased significantly during the 3 postoperative years (from mean 163 U/l to 248 U/l, P < 0.01) and tended to be higher (248 U/l compared with 216 U/l in the pouch group). None of the patients developed oesophagitis or pouchitis during the follow-up. One patient developed a bezoar in the pouch 5 years after gastrectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Pouch reconstruction after total gastrectomy is associated with diminished postoperative symptoms, better eating capacity, and decreased weight loss compared with Roux-en-Y reconstruction. Jejunal pouch reconstruction is thus the recommended surgical method after total gastrectomy.     

Postoperative evaluation of the jejunal pouch reconstruction following proximal and distal gastrectomy for cancer

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy of the jejunal pouch reconstruction following subtotal proximal and distal gastrectomy, a retrospective study examining the postoperative condition of patients who underwent different methods of reconstruction after gastrectomy for cancer was undertaken. METHODOLOGY: Various parameters indicative of postoperative function were evaluated at one year postoperatively, and two major groups were examined. The "proximal gastrectomy" group was composed of patients who underwent either 1) proximal gastrectomy with an interposed jejunal pouch (PG-pouch), 2) proximal gastrectomy with simple jejunal interposition (PG-inter), or 3) total gastrectomy with simple jejunal interposition (TG). The "distal gastrectomy" group was composed of patients who underwent either 4) distal gastrectomy with an interposed jejunal pouch (DG-pouch), 5) distal gastrectomy with simple jejunal interposition (DG-inter), or 6) distal gastrectomy with Billroth 1 reconstruction (B-1). RESULTS: Volume of meal intake was better preserved and the incidence of abdominal symptoms were less frequent in the PG-pouch and DG-pouch groups. In the PG-inter, DG-inter and DG-pouch groups, none of the patients experienced heartburn or had endoscopic findings consistent with reflux esophagitis, while 2 patients (20.0%) in the PG-pouch group complained of heartburn with evidence of reflux esophagitis on endoscopy. Increase in blood acetaminophen level was milder in both the PG-pouch and DG-pouch groups, signifying improved gastric emptying. CONCLUSIONS: The jejunal pouch interposition following proximal and distal gastrectomy seems to confer clinical benefit in terms of postoperative function, especially in the form of meal intake, abdominal symptoms, and gastric emptying. The side effect of an improved reservoir may be the incidence of reflux esophagitis seen in 2 patients in the PG-pouch group.     

Pattern of recurrence after esophageal resection for cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Surgery is still the main treatment option for esophageal cancer; however, long-term survival has remained poor, even when a curative operation is performed. The present study was undertaken to analyze the pattern and time of recurrence after a curative esophagectomy. METHODOLOGY: We studied 53 patients who underwent curative esophageal resection for cancer between 1985 and 1994. We examined number and pattern of recurrences, time after surgery, and any factor with contribution to carcinoma recurrence. RESULTS: During the follow-up period, 34 patients had tumor recurrence. The disease-free interval was 12.7 months (SD = 9.8). Twenty patients (58.9%) developed extrathoracic tumor recurrence and 23 patients (67.6%) intrathoracic. In 3 cases an esophageal stump recurrence was presented. Thirteen patients were considered for palliative treatment after recurrence. The 5-year survival rate was 13%, with median survival time between recurrence and death, 4.1 months. The recurrence of disease was always before 40 months after surgery. Any significant difference related with recurrence was observed between the analyzed factors. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of recurrences are developed before 2 years. Neoplastic recurrence is most common at the mediastinum. Palliative treatments after recurrence do not modify the progression of tumor.     

Postoperative hyperbilirubinemia after resection of thoracic esophageal cancer

The rate of occurrence of postoperative hyperbilirubinemia (PHB) following esophagectomy for thoracic esophageal cancer was 67%, 115/171 cases, which was significantly higher than those following total gastrectomy (28%, 40/144 cases) and colectomy (12%, 7/59 cases). Among the operative procedures, right thoracotomy with extensive lymphoadenectomy had the highest rate of PHB (87%), perhaps due to the longest operation time and the largest intraoperative blood loss. Preoperative risk factors were glucose intolerance, reduced lymphocyte count, and poor nutritional state. The change in bile acid composition, as well as the elevation of alkaline phosphatase and gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase, indicated the presence of postoperative cholestasis which was relevant to total parenteral nutrition. The results suggest that the development of PHB was related to the extent of surgery and the use of parenteral nutrition.     

Appraisal of the simultaneous right-thoracic and abdominal approach with intrathoracic reconstruction after esophageal resection for patients with intrathoracic esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This study evaluated the surgical procedure with the simultaneous right-thoracic and abdominal approaches with intrathoracic reconstruction after performing a macroscopically curable esophageal resection and a mediastio-abdominal extended lymphadenectomy as the standard operation for patients with intrathoracic esophageal cancer. METHODOLOGY: Forty-seven patients with thoracic esophageal cancer were operated on at the Department of Surgery I, Gunma University Hospital from 1995 to 1999. Before the end of 1997, all 21 cases underwent subtotal esophagectomy with three-field lymphadenectomy. After 1998, however, 16 cases underwent the same procedure while the remaining 10 underwent a simultaneous right-thoracic and abdominal approach with intrathoracic reconstruction with lymphadenectomy based on our criteria (Group I). Postoperative factors including the data of cytokines were compared between Group I and conventional subtotal (10 cases) esophagectomy with three-field lymphadenectomy (Group II, 37 cases). RESULTS: None of the patients in Group I has shown a recurrence of cancer. The CRP levels at 2 POD and the serum IL 6 levels at 3 POD were significantly lower in Group I than in Group II (p<0.05), and the postoperative duration of mechanical ventilation was also significantly shorter in Group I than in Group II (p<0.001). The postoperative body weight gain at 12 months after surgery was also higher in Group I than in Group II. CONCLUSIONS: This procedure is indicated for patients with esophageal cancer, located in the middle- or lower-thoracic esophagus, limited to within the esophageal wall, and without either upper mediastinal or neck lymph node metastasis, in order to not only cure the cancer but also in order to improve the postoperative quality of life.     

Application of endoscopic mucosal resection for hypopharyngeal cancer

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) was applied in an 80‐year‐old Japanese man with stage I hypopharyngeal cancer because he refused further radical therapy after esophagogastrectomy for gastric and esophageal cancers. Although EMR was successfully performed without complications, histopathologic investigation revealed cancer‐positive lateral margins. Furthermore, another biopsy from the right aryepiglottic fold yielded a diagnosis of laryngeal cancer. Radiation therapy was ultimately performed because of the possibility of residual tumor and coexistent laryngeal cancer. Endoscopic mucosal resection as a curative treatment for hypopharyngeal cancer is associated with several problems that must be resolved before general application is feasible. However, the present case, at least, shows the possibility of using EMR as a diagnostic procedure and as a less invasive palliative treatment.     

Function of a free jejunal "conduit" graft in the cervical esophagus

The function of an autotransplanted jejunal graft used to reconstruct the pharyngoesophagus was evaluated in 12 patients, 2-40 mo after surgery. On clinical assessment most patients swallowed liquids and solids with minimal difficulty, although several described a need for liquids to "flush" solids to the stomach. Radiologic studies demonstrated a delay in orogastric transit in some patients above the lower anastomosis. The mechanism was apparent on motility studies: swallows generally failed to induce contractions in the graft, although the esophagus below exhibited stripping peristaltic waves. Regular contractile activity, characteristic of phase III of the intestinal migrating motor complex, was identified in 11 grafts. There was no temporal association between migrating motor complexes in the graft and those recorded at the jejunal donor site. Instillation of nutrients into the gastric antrum induced a typical "fed" pattern of contractions in the intact jejunum but not in the extrinsically denervated graft. In conclusion, the graft provides a useful, though generally passive conduit. The graft maintains its intrinsic motor repertoire, which is asynchronous with that of the donor site. The findings also support the hypothesis that extrinsic nerves are required to induce a "fed" pattern of intestinal motility.     

Long-term and short-term evaluation of esophageal reconstruction using the colon or the jejunum in esophageal cancer patients after gastrectomy

SUMMARY.  For esophageal cancer patients, the gastric tube is the first choice as an esophageal substitute, with the colon or the jejunum being used when the stomach cannot be used. We retrospectively compared these two methods from the viewpoint of peri-operative complications and long-term bodyweight alteration. From 1998 to 2005 53 patients who had undergone subtotal esophagectomy due to thoracic esophageal cancers were given reconstruction with the colon (28 cases) or the jejunum (25 cases). Both intestines were reconstructed via the subcutaneous route and were anastomosed to the internal mammalian artery and vein for a supercharged blood supply. There was no difference in operating time and blood loss. Compared with the colon reconstruction group, the hospital stay of the jejunum reconstruction group was significantly shorter (65 days vs 45 days, P  = 0.0120) and the incidence of anastomotic leakage tended to be less (13 cases, 46% vs 6 cases, 24%, P  = 0.1507), while other operative morbidity did not differ between the two groups. Bodyweight loss, which is a serious postoperative sequela after esophagectomy, was less in the jejunum group than in the colon group, showing a significant difference at 12 months after surgery. Our retrospective study revealed the jejunum to be superior to the colon for the reconstruction after esophagectomy along with gastrectomy, with respect to anastomotic leakage and bodyweight loss. The next step will be to conduct a prospective large cohort study.