The effect of early oral feeding after subtotal esophagectomy with immediate esophageal reconstruction on the patients’ nutritional status: randomized single-center study.

Background: The efficiency of early oral feeding (EOF) in the postoperative period is well known. Though in the esophagus surgery doctors still prefer another types of nutritional support after esophagectomy (EE) with immediate gastric tube reconstruction. Aims: to improve the results of patients treatment after EE with gastric tube reconstruction by choosing the method of nutritional support and to evaluate nutritional status of the patients with EOF. Materials and methods: weve conducted prospective single-center randomized study. Subtotal esophagectomy with immediate gastric tube reconstruction was performed to 60 patients. In the postoperative period we evaluated the results of treatment, the frequency and severity of complications, as well as anthropometric and laboratory indicators of the nutritional status before the operation, on 1, 3 and 6 postoperative day (POD). Results: Patients without high risk of malnutrition were randomly divided in 2 groups: main group (n=30) starting EOF on the 1 POD and control group (n=30) that remained nil by mouth and got parenteral feeding within 4 POD. The patients of EOF group had statistically significant earlier gas discharge (2[2;3] POD vs 4[3;6] POD, р = 0,000042) and stool appearance (3[2;4] POD vs 5[4;7] POD, р = 0,000004). There is a tendency of reduction of the duration of postoperative hospitalization in EOF group (8[7;9] POD vs 9[8;9] POD, р=0,13). EOF does not affect on frequency (46,6% vs 53,3%, р=0,66) and character of postoperative complications. After evaluation of the parameters of nutritional status we found statistically significant decrease of prealbumin level on 3 POD in EOF group (0,17 [0,13;0,21] vs 0,2 [0,16;0,34], р=0,03) of due to inability to compensate daily calorie needs in the first days after the operation. At 6 POD prealbumin became the same in both groups. There were no other significant differences between the groups. Conclusions: EOF after EE with immediate gastric tube reconstruction is safe and effective. EOF doesnt increase the frequency of anastomotic insufficiency and other complications.

757 AN APPROACH TO ACCELERATE HEALING AND SHORTEN THE HOSPITAL STAY OF PATIENTS WITH ANASTOMOTIC LEAKAGE AFTER ESOPHAGECTOMY

To explore the comprehensive role of systemic endoscopic intervention in healing esophageal anastomotic leak. To our knowledge, this paper is the first to discuss the outcome of anastomotic leaks and the association with healing time rather than whether the leak was fully healed. Methods In total, 3919 consecutive patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy and immediate esophageal reconstruction between January 2012 and August 2019 at Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center were screened. In total, 203 patients (5.10%) diagnosed with postoperative anastomotic leakage were included. The participants were divided into three groups according to differences in diagnosis and treatment procedures. Ninety-four patients received conventional management, 87 patients received endoscopic diagnosis only, and the remaining 22 patients received systematic endoscopic intervention, including transnasal inner drainage, endoscopic fibrin glue repair and endoscopic clipping. The primary endpoint was overall healing of the leak after oncologic esophageal surgery. Results In total, 173 (85.2%; 95% CI, 80.3–90.1%) of the 203 patients were successfully healed, with a mean healing time of 64.42 ± 3.82 days (median: 51 days; range: 13 368 days), and the overall healing rates differed significantly among the three groups according to the stratified log-rank test (P < 0.001). The median healing time of leakage was 44 days (95% CI: 27.15–60.86 days) in the endoscopic intervention group, 51 days (95% CI: 44.86–57.14 days) in the endoscopic diagnostic group, and 66 days (95% CI: 58.09–73.91 days) in the conventional group. Conclusion Tailored endoscopic treatment for postoperative esophageal anastomotic leakage based on endoscopic diagnosis is feasible and effective. Systematic endoscopic intervention shortened the treatment period and reduced mortality and should therefore be considered in the management of this disease.

Favorable Outcome of Electively Delayed Elongation Procedure in Long-Gap Esophageal Atresia

The ideal approach to long gap esophageal atresia is still controversial. On one hand, preserving a patient's native esophagus may require several steps and can be fraught with complications. On the other hand, most replacement procedures are irreversible and disrupt gastrointestinal physiology. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short- and medium-term outcome of electively delayed esophageal elongation procedures before esophageal reconstruction in patients with long-gap esophageal atresia. Since the neonatal esophagus grows over-proportionally and can increase its wall thickness in the first few months of life, we hypothesized that postponing the elongation steps until 3 months of age would lead to a lower complication rate. We thus retrospectively recorded complications such as mediastinitis, anastomotic leakage, stricture formation, or gastroesophageal reflux requiring surgery, and compared it to reported outcomes. In our treatment protocol, patients born with long-gap esophageal atresia underwent gastrostomy placement and were sham fed until 3 months of age. We then assessed the gap between the esophageal ends and started serial elongation procedures. We only proceeded to the reconstruction of the esophagus when its length allowed a tension-free anastomosis. From April 2013 to April 2019, we treated 13 Patients with long-gap esophageal atresia. Nine patients without prior surgical procedures underwent Foker procedures. Four patients arrived with a pre-existing cervical esophagostomy and thus underwent Kimura's procedure, two of them with a concomitant Foker elongation of the lower pouch. Esophageal reconstruction was feasible in all patients, while none of them developed mediastinitis at any point in their treatment. We managed the only anastomotic leak conservatively. Almost half of the patients did not require any further intervention following reconstruction, while three patients required multiple (≥5) anastomotic dilatations. All but one patient achieved full oral nutrition. Only one child required a fundoplication to manage gastroesophageal reflux symptoms. Electively delayed esophageal elongation procedures in patients with long-gap esophageal atresia allowed preservation of the native esophagus in all patients. The approach had low peri-procedural morbidity, and patients enjoy favorable functional outcomes. Therefore, we suggest considering this method in the management of patients with long-gap esophageal atresia.

An Approach to Accelerate Healing and Shorten the Hospital Stay of Patients With Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy: An Explorative Study of Systematic Endoscopic Intervention

ObjectiveTo explore the comprehensive role of systemic endoscopic intervention in healing esophageal anastomotic leak.MethodsIn total, 3919 consecutive patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy and immediate esophageal reconstruction were screened. In total, 203 patients (5.10%) diagnosed with anastomotic leakage were included. The participants were divided into three groups according to differences in diagnosis and treatment procedures. Ninety-four patients received conventional management, 87 patients received endoscopic diagnosis only, and the remaining 22 patients received systematic endoscopic intervention. The primary endpoint was overall healing of the leak after oncologic esophageal surgery. The secondary endpoints were the time from surgery to recovery and the occurrence of adverse events.Results173 (85.2%; 95% CI, 80.3-90.1%) of the 203 patients were successfully healed, with a mean healing time of 66.04 ± 3.59 days (median: 51 days; range: 13-368 days), and the overall healing rates differed significantly among the three groups according to the stratified log-rank test (P<0.001). The median healing time of leakage was 37 days (95% CI: 33.32-40.68 days) in the endoscopic intervention group, 51 days (95% CI: 44.86-57.14 days) in the endoscopic diagnostic group, and 67 days (95% CI: 56.27-77.73 days) in the conventional group. The overall survival rate was 78.7% (95% CI: 70.3 to 87.2%) in the conventional management group, 89.7% (95% CI: 83.1 to 96.2%) in the endoscopic diagnostic group and 95.5% (95% CI: 86.0 to 100%) in the systematic endoscopic intervention group. Landmark analysis indicated that the speed of wound healing in the endoscopic intervention group was 2-4 times faster at any period than that in the conservative group. There were 20 (21.28%) deaths among the 94 patients in the conventional group, 9 (10.34%) deaths among the 87 patients in the endoscopic diagnostic group and 1 (4.55%) death among the 22 patients in the endoscopic intervention group; this difference was statistically significant (Fisher exact test, P < 0.05).ConclusionTailored endoscopic treatment for postoperative esophageal anastomotic leakage based on endoscopic diagnosis is feasible and effective. Systematic endoscopic intervention shortened the treatment period and reduced mortality and should therefore be considered in the management of this disease.