Preoperative imaging and prediction of oesophageal conduit necrosis after oesophagectomy for cancer. BJS 2017; 104: 1346-1354.
Published: 11th May 2017
Authors: P. Lainas, D. Fuks, S. Gaujoux, Z. Machroub, A. Fregeville, T. Perniceni et al.
Oesophageal conduit necrosis following oesophagectomy is a rare but life‐threatening complication. The present study aimed to assess the impact of coeliac axis stenosis on outcomes after oesophagectomy for cancer.
The study included consecutive patients who had an Ivor Lewis procedure with curative intent for middle‐ and lower‐third oesophageal cancer at two tertiary referral centres. All patients underwent preoperative multidetector
Some 481 patients underwent an Ivor Lewis procedure. Of these, ten (2·1 per cent) developed oesophageal conduit necrosis after surgery. Coeliac artery evaluation revealed a completely normal artery in 431 patients (91·5 per cent) in the group without conduit necrosis and in one (10 per cent) with necrosis (
This study suggests that oesophageal conduit necrosis after oesophagectomy for cancer may be due to pre‐existing coeliac axis stenosis.Read more
You may also be interested in
Cost‐effectiveness analysis of stent type in endoscopic treatment of gastric leak after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.
Authors: C. Cosse, L. Rebibo, F. Brazier, S. Hakim, R. Delcenserie, J. M. Regimbeau et al.
Notes: Double pigtail is better
Authors: R. T. van der Kaaij, M. V. de Rooij, F. van Coevorden, F. E. M. Voncken, P. Snaebjornsson, H. Boot et al.
Notes: Quality of care in one number
[18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT and prediction of histopathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and oesophagogastric junction. BJS 2018; 105: 419-428.
Authors: T. Harustiak, M. Zemanova, P. Fencl, L. Hornofova, A. Pazdro, M. Snajdauf et al.
Notes: Of no use
Intrathoracic versus cervical anastomosis and predictors of anastomotic leakage after oesophagectomy for cancer.
Authors: J. A. H. Gooszen, L. Goense, S. S. Gisbertz, J. P. Ruurda, R. van Hillegersberg, M. I. van Berge Henegouwen et al.
Notes: Chest lower leak rates
Meta‐analysis of delayed gastric emptying after pylorus‐preserving versus pylorus‐resecting pancreatoduodenectomy. BJS 2018; 105: 339-349.
Authors: U. Klaiber, P. Probst, O. Strobel, C. W. Michalski, C. Dörr‐Harim, M. K. Diener et al.
Notes: No difference
Meta‐analysis of metabolic surgery versus medical treatment for microvascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. BJS 2018; 105: 168-181.
Authors: A. T. Billeter, K. M. Scheurlen, P. Probst, S. Eichel, F. Nickel, S. Kopf et al.
Notes: Surgery is better
Health‐related quality of life after open transhiatal and transthoracic oesophagectomy for cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 230-236.
Authors: J. H. Kauppila, A. Johar, J. A. Gossage, A. R. Davies, J. Zylstra, J. Lagergren et al.
Notes: Favours transhiatal
Patient‐derived organoid models help define personalized management of gastrointestinal cancer. BJS 2018; 105: e48-e60.
Authors: M. R. Aberle, R. A. Burkhart, H. Tiriac, S. W. M. Olde Damink, C. H. C. Dejong, D. A. Tuveson et al.
Notes: Accelerating the science of personal care
Meta‐analysis of the prognostic value of CpG island methylator phenotype in gastric cancer. BJS 2018; 105: e61-e68.
Authors: A. G. M. T. Powell, S. Soul, A. Christian, W. G. Lewis
Notes: Heterogeneity in gene panels used
Authors: K. Boye, J.‐M. Berner, I. Hompland, Ø. S. Bruland, S. Stoldt, K. Sundby Hall et al.
Notes: Handle with care
Outcomes after prophylactic gastrectomy for hereditary diffuse gastric cancer. BJS 2018; 105: e176-e182.
Authors: R. T. van der Kaaij, J. P. van Kessel, J. M. van Dieren, P. Snaebjornsson, O. Balagué, F. van Coevorden et al.
Notes: Frozen section of margins is key
Circulating tumour cells and DNA as liquid biopsies in gastrointestinal cancer. BJS 2018; 105: e110-e120.
Authors: O. Nordgård, K. Tjensvoll, B. Gilje, K. Søreide
Notes: The inner space frontier