Intrathoracic versus cervical anastomosis and predictors of anastomotic leakage after oesophagectomy for cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 552-560.
Published: 7th February 2018
Authors: J. A. H. Gooszen, L. Goense, S. S. Gisbertz, J. P. Ruurda, R. van Hillegersberg, M. I. van Berge Henegouwen et al.
Studies comparing the anastomotic leak rate in patients with an intrathoracic
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.
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
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
You may also be interested in
Authors: T. Mizuno, T. Ebata, Y. Yokoyama, T. Igami, J. Yamaguchi, S. Onoe et al.
Authors: C. Andolfi, P. M. Fisichella
Systematic review of management of incidental gallbladder cancer after cholecystectomy. BJS 2019; 106: 32-45.
Authors: K. Søreide, R. V. Guest, E. M. Harrison, T. J. Kendall, O. J. Garden, S. J. Wigmore et al.
Relationship between R1 resection, tumour rupture and recurrence in resected gastrointestinal stromal tumour.
Authors: T. Hølmebakk, B. Bjerkehagen, I. Hompland, S. Stoldt, K. Boye
Notes: Tumour rupture is most important
Survival after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and oesophagectomy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy for patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. BJS 2019; 106: 255-262.
Authors: B.‐Y. Wang, S.‐C. Wu, H.‐C. Chen, W.‐H. Hung, C.‐H. Lin, C.‐L. Huang et al.
Notes: Surgery after chemoradiation indicated
Effect of preoperative biliary drainage on cholestasis‐associated inflammatory and fibrotic gene signatures in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. BJS 2019; 106: 55-58.
Authors: M. J. Reiniers, L. de Haan, R. Weijer, J. K. Wiggers, A. Jongejan, P. D. Moerland et al.
Impact of postoperative complications on outcomes after oesophagectomy for cancer. BJS 2019; 106: 111-119.
Authors: L. Goense, J. Meziani, J. P. Ruurda, R. van Hillegersberg
Meta‐analysis of the influence of lifestyle changes for preoperative weight loss on surgical outcomes. BJS 2019; 106: 181-189.
Authors: M. Roman, A. Monaghan, G. F. Serraino, D. Miller, S. Pathak, F. Lai et al.
Notes: Possible but how much is enough?
Multicentre cohort study of antihypertensive and lipid‐lowering therapy cessation after bariatric surgery. BJS 2019; 106: 286-295.
Authors: J. Thereaux, T. Lesuffleur, S. Czernichow, A. Basdevant, S. Msika, D. Nocca et al.
Notes: Better than controls
Overall survival before and after centralization of gastric cancer surgery in the Netherlands. BJS 2018; 105: 1807-1815.
Authors: M. van Putten, S. D. Nelen, V. E. P. P. Lemmens, J. H. M. B. Stoot, H. H. Hartgrink, S. S. Gisbertz et al.
Notes: Practice makes perfect?
Oesophagectomy with or without supraclavicular lymphadenectomy after neoadjuvant treatment for squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus. BJS 2018; 105: 1793-1798.
Authors: S. Mine, M. Watanabe, K. Kumagai, A. Okamura, K. Yamashita, M. Hayami et al.
Notes: Extended dissection not needed
Population‐based cohort study of diabetes mellitus and mortality in gastric adenocarcinoma. BJS 2018; 105: 1799-1806.
Authors: J. Zheng, S.‐H. Xie, G. Santoni, J. Lagergren
Notes: Diabetes increases risk