309 ASSOCIATION BETWEEN CERVICAL ANASTOMOSIS METHODS AND ANASTOMOSIS STRICTURE AFTER ESOPHAGECTOMY FOR CANCER

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Akihiro Suzuki

Abstract   Esophagectomy with three-field lymph node dissection is the most important part of advanced esophageal cancer therapy, especially for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) patients. After esophagectomy, cervical anastomosis with gastric tube is required. However, some patients suffer anastomotic stenosis and require endoscopic balloon dilations. In this study, we investigated the relationship between cervical anastomosis methods and anastomosis stricture after esophagectomy for cancer patients. Methods Patients with esophageal cancer undergoing radical esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis were identified from the prospectively maintained database at our institution. From 2013 to 2019, 28 patients received esophagectomy with cervical lymph node dissection in our institution. Association between anastomotic methods, linear stapler vs circular stapler, and other factors (patient characteristics, surgical complications including anastomotic stenosis, and length of postoperative stay) were analyzed. Results Their average age was 63.3 years. Males and SCC cases predominated. Thirteen patients (46%) received cervical anastomosis with the circular stapler (Group C), and 11 patients (39%) received treatment with the linear stapler (Group L). None of the following variables were significant different between the two methods: preoperative chemotherapy (53.8% in group C vs. 45.5% in group L; p = 0.58), length of hospital stay (25.8 vs. 20.7 days; p = 0.15), pulmonary complications (16.7% vs. 0.0%; p = 0.36), and anastomotic leakage (33.3% vs. 9.1%; p = 0.24). However, the rate of anastomotic stenosis without malignancies was significantly higher in group C patients (66.7% vs. 0%, p < 0.01). Conclusion Cervical anastomosis with the linear stapler may be safer and associated with a lower stenosis rate than with the circular stapler. In future, cervical anastomosis with linear stapler after mediastinoscopic esophagectomy would be better for not only esophageal SCC patients but also esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma patients with pulmonary complications.

2003 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 903-908 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wentao Fang ◽  
Hoichi Kato ◽  
Yuji Tachimori ◽  
Hiroyasu Igaki ◽  
Hiroshi Sato ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiangbo Lin ◽  
Mingqiang Kang ◽  
Shuchen Chen ◽  
Fan Deng ◽  
Zhiyang Han ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. 719-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
TADASUKE HASHIGUCHI ◽  
MOTOMI NASU ◽  
TAKASHI HASHIMOTO ◽  
TETSUJI KUNIYASU ◽  
HIROHUMI INOUE ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 41-41
Author(s):  
Xiaofeng Duan ◽  
Zhentao Yu

Abstract Background Esophagectomy and lymph node dissection is still the main treatment for esophageal cancer. Endoscopic mucosal resection and submucosal dissection are increasingly becoming a treatment of choice to preserve the integrity of the esophagus and decrease the surgical trauma in early esophageal cancer. However, lymph node metastasos (LNM) risk is still a debate focus for the decision of treatment selection. Our objective was to evaluate the prevalence, pattern and risk factors of LNM in early stage esophageal cancer to improve surgical treatment allocation. Methods We identified patients with pathological T1 stage esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy and lymph node dissection. The pattern of LNM was analyzed and the risk factors related to LNM were assessed by univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis.The nomogram model was used to estimate the individual risk of lymph node metastasis. Results In 143 patients, LNM rates were: all patients 17.5%, T1a 8.0%, and T1b 22.5% for T1b. Depth of tumor infiltration (P < 0.05), tumor size (P < 0.01), tumor location (P < 0.05), and tumor differentiation (P < 0.01) were independent risk factors related to LNM. These four parameters allowed the compilation of a nomogram to estimate the individual risk of LNM. Fig. Nomogram to estimate the individual risk of LNM. Each characteristic of the included parameters scores a specific number of points (points per parameter). The summarized total points score indicates the probability of LNM. For a middle esophageal cancer with middle differentiated (G2), 3 cm tumor (> 2.5cm) that invades the submucosa (pT1b), the calculated total scores is 129.5 = 87.5 + 21 + 0 + 21, hence the corresponding LNM risk is 20%. Conclusion T1 esophageal cancer has a relatively high LNM rate, and the depth of tumor infiltration, tumor size, tumor location and tumor differentiation are correlated with LNM. Nomograms that include factors can be used to predict individual LNM risk. The LNM risk and extent must be considered comprehensively in decision-making of a better surgical treatment and lymph node dissection strategy. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document