Effect of Pyloroplasty on Gastric Conduit Emptying and Patients' Quality of Life After Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy

Author(s):  
Carlo Alberto De Pasqual ◽  
Jacopo Weindelmayer ◽  
Laura Gobbi ◽  
Luca Alberti ◽  
Alessandro Veltri ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 88-88
Author(s):  
Renquan Zhang ◽  
Yunlong Huang

Abstract Background Esophageal cancer was the ninth most common malignant tumor and ranked sixth for death globally, especially in developing country[1]. Standardized esophagectomy followed by chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy remains the curative treatment for esophageal cancer[2]. Ivor Lewis esophageal resection, including two-stage approach for carcinoma of the middle third of the esophagus, was proposed in 1946[3]. Meanwhile, to avoid the risk of anastomotic leakage in Ivor Lewis surgery, three-stage approach with cervical anastomosis was introduced by McKeown[4]. However, considering the less complications of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and the increased incidence of distal esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, two-stage approach with intrathoracic anastomosis was gaining more attention. Recent years, thoracoscopic laparoscopic esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis (TLE-chest) has gradually become the mainstream approach of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for the treatment of middle and lower esophageal cancers. In the previous study, we described the technique strategies of TLE-chest, which was featured with improved anastomosis layer by layer and embedding of the anastomosis with preserved mediastinal pleura[5]. In this study, we presented the perioperative data, complications and long-term survivals of TLE-chest in esophageal cancers. Methods The clinical data of 201 patients, who underwent TLE-chest for primary esophageal cancer in the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University (FAHAMU) from November 2011 to December 2015, was analyzed retrospectively. Postoperative patients’ life quality by the European Organization into Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire for esophageal cancer and overall survivals were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier curve. The normal distribution of the measured data is expressed in terms of x ± s. Cox's hazard regression model was used for single factor and multi-factor analysis. Results Overall, 168 (83.6%) patients were males and 33 (16.4%) were females. The mean age of patients was 62.7 years old (range from 40 to 88). 150 (74.6%) patients’ tumors were located in the middle of esophagus, whereas 50 (24.9%) and 1 (0.5%) tumors were in the low and up. 194 (96.5%) esophageal tumors were confirmed as squamous carcinoma expect 7 (3.5%) adenocarcinomas. The mean of tumor size was 3.7 cm and the numbers of postoperative pathological TNM classification I, II, III and IV were 38 (18.9%), 72 (35.8%), 73 (36.3%) and 18 (9%) respectively. The average of total operation time was 293.9 min. Among them, the means of VATS and LS time were 156.9 min and 116.5 min respectively. The mean of intraoperative blood loss was 77.5 ml. The number of resected lymph nodes was 22.9 ± 9.7 (maximum: 58).7 (3.5%) patients suffered from anastomotic fistula, 5 (2.5%) patients occurred RRLN injury in lymph nodes dissection and 5 (2.5%) suffered chylothorax. Pulmonary complications were observed in 21 (10.4%) patients. Meanwhile, the rates of other complications containing anastomotic stenosis, bleeding and delayed gastric empty were 0.5% (1/201), 1.5% (3/201) and 0.5% (1/201) respectively. The score of quality of patients’ life was 85 ± 6.5. And at the 12 months, quality of life was improved by 4.1%. Until up to the 24 months, patients’ quality of life was recovered to 90 ± 7.5. The 1, 2 and 3 years overall survival of 100 patients was 94%, 79% and 74% respectively. Univariate analysis showed that the pT stage (P = 0.040), pN stage (P = 0.001), pTNM stage(P = 0.001) and Total operative time(P = 0.000) were associated with 3-year overall survival (3-OS). Further, multivariate analysis affirmed that the operative time (≥ 311 min), tumor size (≥ 3.5 cm) and pTNM stage were independent prognostic factors for 3-OS (P < 0.05). Conclusion TLE-chest surgery in esophageal cancer was safe and effective. And the total operative time, tumor size and TNM stage could be used as independent prognostic indicators in esophageal cancer patients after the TLE-chest. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Jezerskyte ◽  
L M Saadeh ◽  
E R C Hagens ◽  
M A G Sprangers ◽  
L Noteboom ◽  
...  

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to investigate the difference in long-term health-related quality of life in patients undergoing total gastrectomy versus Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in a tertiary referral center. Background & Methods Surgical treatment for gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers is challenging. Both a total gastrectomy and an esophagectomy can be performed. Which of the two should be preferred is unknown given the scarce evidence regarding effects on surgical morbidity, pathology, long-term survival and health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). From 2014 to 2018, patients with a follow-up of > 1 year after either a total gastrectomy or an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for GEJ or cardia carcinoma completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-OG25 questionnaires. Problems with eating, reflux and nausea and vomiting were chosen as the primary HR-QoL endpoints. The secondary endpoints were the remaining HR-QoL domains, postoperative complications and pathology results. Multivariable linear regression was applied taking confounders age, gender, ASA classification and neoadjuvant therapy into account. Results 30 patients after gastrectomy and 71 after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with a mean age of 63 years were included. Median follow-up was two years (range 12-84 months). Patients after total gastrectomy reported significantly less choking when swallowing and coughing (β=-5.952, 95% CI -9.437 – -2.466; β=-13.084, 95% CI -18.525 – -7.643). Problems with eating, reflux and nausea and vomiting were not significantly different between the two groups. No significant difference was found in postoperative complications or Clavien-Dindo grade. Significantly more lymph nodes were resected in esophagectomy group (p=0.008). No difference in number of positive lymph nodes or R0 resection was found. Conclusion After a follow-up of > 1 year choking when swallowing and coughing were less common after total gastrectomy. No significant difference was found in problems with eating, reflux or nausea and vomiting nor in postoperative complications or radicality of surgery. Based on this study no general preference can be given to either of the procedures for GEJ cancer. Patients may be informed about the HR-QoL domains that are likely to be affected by the different surgical procedures, which in turn may support shared decision making when a choice between the two treatment options is possible.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Jezerskyte ◽  
L M Saadeh ◽  
E R C Hagens ◽  
M A G Sprangers ◽  
L Noteboom ◽  
...  

Abstract Aim The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference in long-term health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) between McKeown and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in a tertiary referral center. Background & Methods The therapy of esophageal cancers consist of (neo)adjuvant chemo(radio)therapy and surgery. Often different surgical approaches are possible such as transthoracic esophagectomy with a cervical anastomosis (McKeown) or an intrathoracic anastomosis (Ivor Lewis). Evidence is scarce on whether either of these approaches is better in terms of survival, perioperative morbidity, pathology results and quality of life. Patients with mid-, distal esophageal, gastroesophageal (GEJ) or cardia carcinoma who have undergone a McKeown or an Ivor lewis esophagectomy in the period of 2003 – 2018 were included in this study. EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-OG25 questionnaires were handed out during the outpatient clinic visits and a follow-up of at least one year was ensured. Problems with eating, reflux and nausea and vomiting were chosen as primary HR-QoL domain endpoints while the remaining HR-QoL domains, postoperative complications and pathology results were observed as secondary endpoints. Correction for confounders age and gender was performed. Results 147 patients were included in the McKeown group and 120 in the Ivor Lewis group. Mean age was 63.5 years and median follow-up was three years (range 12-137 months). No significant difference was found in problems with eating, reflux and nausea and vomiting. Significantly more problems with eating with others were found in McKeown group (β=10.435, 95% CI 4.474 – 16.395) and anastomotic leakage was significantly more common after McKeown esophagectomy (p=0.004). No significant difference was found in Clavien Dindo classification. During Ivor Lewis esophagectomy significantly more lymph nodes were resected (p<0.001). Number of lymph node metastases and R0 resection rate did not differ between groups. Conclusion No major differences in long-term HR-QoL were found in patients with mid-, distal esophageal, GEJ or cardia carcinoma following McKeown or Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Problems with eating with others and anastomotic leakages were more common after McKeown esophagectomy, however, Clavien Dindo classification and radicality of surgery were similar between the two groups. Results of this study could assist the patient during the decision-making process prior to the surgery.


2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 838-848 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Jezerskyte ◽  
L. M. Saadeh ◽  
E. R. C. Hagens ◽  
M. A. G. Sprangers ◽  
L. Noteboom ◽  
...  

Abstract Background There is scarce evidence on whether a total gastrectomy or an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy is preferred for gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers regarding effects on morbidity, pathology, survival and health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). The aim of this study was to investigate the difference in long-term HR-QoL in patients undergoing total gastrectomy versus Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in a tertiary referral center. Methods Patients with a follow-up of >1 year after a total gastrectomy or an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for GEJ/cardia carcinoma completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-OG25 questionnaires. ‘Problems with eating,’ ‘reflux,’ and ‘nausea and vomiting’ were the primary HR-QoL endpoints. The secondary endpoints were the remaining HR-QoL domains, postoperative complications and pathology results. Results Thirty patients after gastrectomy and 71 after esophagectomy were included. Mean age was 63 years. Median follow-up was 2 years (range 12–84 months). Patients after gastrectomy reported less ‘choking when swallowing’ and ‘coughing’ (β = − 5.952, 95% CI − 9.437 to − 2.466; β = − 13.084, 95% CI − 18.525 to − 7.643). More lymph nodes were resected in esophagectomy group (p = 0.008). No difference was found in number of positive lymph nodes, R0 resection or postoperative complications. Conclusions After a follow-up of >1 year ‘choking when swallowing’ and ‘coughing’ were less common after a total gastrectomy. No differences were found in postoperative complications or radicality of surgery. Based on this study, no general preference can be given to either of the procedures for GEJ cancer. These results support shared decision making when a choice between the two treatment options is possible.


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Tachezy ◽  
Seung-Hun Chon ◽  
Isabel Rieck ◽  
Marcus Kantowski ◽  
Hildegard Christ ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Intrathoracic anastomotic leaks represent a major complication after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. There are two promising endoscopic treatment strategies in the case of leaks: the placement of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) or endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT). Up to date, there is no prospective data concerning the optimal endoscopic treatment strategy. This is a protocol description for the ESOLEAK trial, which is a first small phase 2 randomized trial evaluating the quality of life after treatment of anastomotic leaks by either SEMS placement or EVT. Methods This phase 2 randomized trial will be conducted at two German tertiary medical centers and include a total of 40 patients within 2 years. Adult patients with histologically confirmed esophageal cancer, who have undergone Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and show an esophagogastric anastomotic leak on endoscopy or present with typical clinical signs linked to an anastomotic leak, will be included in our study taking into consideration the exclusion criteria. After endoscopic verification of the anastomotic leak, patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio into two treatment groups. The intervention group will receive EVT whereas the control group will be treated with SEMS. The primary endpoint of this study is the subjective quality of life assessed by the patient using a systematic and validated questionnaire (EORTC QLQ C30, EORTC QLQ-OES18 questionnaire). Important secondary endpoints are healing rate, period of hospitalization, treatment-related complications, and overall mortality. Discussion The latest meta-analysis comparing implantation of SEMS with EVT in the treatment of esophageal anastomotic leaks suggested a higher success rate for EVT. The ESOLEAK trial is the first study comparing both treatments in a prospective manner. The aim of the trial is to find suitable endpoints for the treatment of anastomotic leaks as well as to enable an adequate sample size calculation and evaluate the feasibility of future interventional trials. Due to the exploratory design of this pilot study, the sample size is too small to answer the question, whether EVT or SEMS implantation represents the superior treatment strategy. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03962244. Registered on May 23, 2019. DRKS-ID DRKS00007941


2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (9) ◽  
pp. 2345-2351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvio Däster ◽  
Savas D. Soysal ◽  
Lea Stoll ◽  
Ralph Peterli ◽  
Markus von Flüe ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 398 (2) ◽  
pp. 231-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian A. Gutschow ◽  
Arnulf H. Hölscher ◽  
Jessica Leers ◽  
Hans Fuchs ◽  
Marc Bludau ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document