We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
Intrathoracic versus cervical anastomosis and predictors of anastomotic leakage after oesophagectomy for cancer.
British Journal of Surgery 2018 April
BACKGROUND: Studies comparing the anastomotic leak rate in patients with an intrathoracic versus a cervical anastomosis after oesophagectomy are equivocal. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcome after oesophagectomy in patients with an intrathoracic or cervical anastomosis, and to identify predictors of anastomotic leakage in a nationwide audit.
METHODS: Between January 2011 and December 2015, all consecutive patients who underwent oesophagectomy for cancer were identified from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit. For the comparison between an intrathoracic and cervical anastomosis, propensity score matching was used to adjust for potential confounders. Multivariable logistic regression modelling with backward stepwise selection was used to determine independent predictors of anastomotic leakage.
RESULTS: Some 3348 patients were included. After propensity score matching, 654 patients were included in both the cervical and intrathoracic anastomosis groups. An intrathoracic anastomosis was associated with a lower leak rate than a cervical anastomosis (17·0 versus 21·9 per cent; P = 0·025). The percentage of patients with recurrent nerve paresis was also lower (0·6 versus 7·0 per cent; P < 0·001) and an intrathoracic anastomosis was associated with a shorter median hospital stay (12 versus 14 days; P = 0·001). Multivariable analysis revealed that ASA fitness grade III or higher, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiac arrhythmia, diabetes mellitus and proximal oesophageal tumours were independent predictors of anastomotic leakage.
CONCLUSION: An intrathoracic oesophagogastric anastomosis was associated with a lower anastomotic leak rate, lower rate of recurrent nerve paresis and a shorter hospital stay. Risk factors for anastomotic leak were co-morbidities and proximal tumours.
METHODS: Between January 2011 and December 2015, all consecutive patients who underwent oesophagectomy for cancer were identified from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit. For the comparison between an intrathoracic and cervical anastomosis, propensity score matching was used to adjust for potential confounders. Multivariable logistic regression modelling with backward stepwise selection was used to determine independent predictors of anastomotic leakage.
RESULTS: Some 3348 patients were included. After propensity score matching, 654 patients were included in both the cervical and intrathoracic anastomosis groups. An intrathoracic anastomosis was associated with a lower leak rate than a cervical anastomosis (17·0 versus 21·9 per cent; P = 0·025). The percentage of patients with recurrent nerve paresis was also lower (0·6 versus 7·0 per cent; P < 0·001) and an intrathoracic anastomosis was associated with a shorter median hospital stay (12 versus 14 days; P = 0·001). Multivariable analysis revealed that ASA fitness grade III or higher, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiac arrhythmia, diabetes mellitus and proximal oesophageal tumours were independent predictors of anastomotic leakage.
CONCLUSION: An intrathoracic oesophagogastric anastomosis was associated with a lower anastomotic leak rate, lower rate of recurrent nerve paresis and a shorter hospital stay. Risk factors for anastomotic leak were co-morbidities and proximal tumours.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app