Cargando…
What is the best reconstruction procedure after esophagectomy? A meta‐analysis comparing posterior mediastinal and retrosternal approaches
Thoracic esophagectomy is a particularly invasive and complicated surgical procedure, with a reconstruction of the gastrointestinal tract, such as the stomach, jejunum, or colon. The posterior mediastinal, retrosternal, and subcutaneous routes are the three possible esophageal reconstruction routes....
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10319624/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37416735 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ags3.12685 |
_version_ | 1785068277450407936 |
---|---|
author | Booka, Eisuke Takeuchi, Hiroya Morita, Yoshifumi Hiramatsu, Yoshihiro Kikuchi, Hirotoshi |
author_facet | Booka, Eisuke Takeuchi, Hiroya Morita, Yoshifumi Hiramatsu, Yoshihiro Kikuchi, Hirotoshi |
author_sort | Booka, Eisuke |
collection | PubMed |
description | Thoracic esophagectomy is a particularly invasive and complicated surgical procedure, with a reconstruction of the gastrointestinal tract, such as the stomach, jejunum, or colon. The posterior mediastinal, retrosternal, and subcutaneous routes are the three possible esophageal reconstruction routes. Each route has advantages and disadvantages, and the optimal reconstruction route after esophagectomy remains controversial. Additionally, the best anastomotic techniques after esophagectomy in terms of location (Ivor Lewis or McKeown) and suturing (manual or mechanical) are debatable. Our meta‐analysis investigating postoperative complications after esophagectomy between the posterior mediastinal and retrosternal routes revealed that the posterior mediastinal route was associated with a significantly lower anastomotic leakage rate than the retrosternal route (odds ratio = 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.70–0.87, p < 0.0001). Conversely, pulmonary complications (odds ratio = 0.80, 95% confidence interval: 0.58–1.11, p = 0.19) and mortality between the posterior mediastinal and retrosternal routes (odds ratio = 0.79, 95% confidence interval: 0.56–1.12, p = 0.19) were not significantly different. However, the incidence of pneumonia may be lower when using the retrosternal route rather than the posterior mediastinal route for performing minimally invasive esophagectomy. The McKeown procedure is oncologically necessary for tumors located above the carina to dissect upper mediastinal and cervical lymph nodes; however, the Ivor Lewis procedure offers perioperative and oncological safety for tumors located under the carina. An individualized treatment strategy for selecting the optimal reconstruction procedure can be proposed in future studies based on oncological and patient risk factors considering mid‐ to long‐term quality of life. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10319624 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103196242023-07-06 What is the best reconstruction procedure after esophagectomy? A meta‐analysis comparing posterior mediastinal and retrosternal approaches Booka, Eisuke Takeuchi, Hiroya Morita, Yoshifumi Hiramatsu, Yoshihiro Kikuchi, Hirotoshi Ann Gastroenterol Surg Review Articles Thoracic esophagectomy is a particularly invasive and complicated surgical procedure, with a reconstruction of the gastrointestinal tract, such as the stomach, jejunum, or colon. The posterior mediastinal, retrosternal, and subcutaneous routes are the three possible esophageal reconstruction routes. Each route has advantages and disadvantages, and the optimal reconstruction route after esophagectomy remains controversial. Additionally, the best anastomotic techniques after esophagectomy in terms of location (Ivor Lewis or McKeown) and suturing (manual or mechanical) are debatable. Our meta‐analysis investigating postoperative complications after esophagectomy between the posterior mediastinal and retrosternal routes revealed that the posterior mediastinal route was associated with a significantly lower anastomotic leakage rate than the retrosternal route (odds ratio = 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.70–0.87, p < 0.0001). Conversely, pulmonary complications (odds ratio = 0.80, 95% confidence interval: 0.58–1.11, p = 0.19) and mortality between the posterior mediastinal and retrosternal routes (odds ratio = 0.79, 95% confidence interval: 0.56–1.12, p = 0.19) were not significantly different. However, the incidence of pneumonia may be lower when using the retrosternal route rather than the posterior mediastinal route for performing minimally invasive esophagectomy. The McKeown procedure is oncologically necessary for tumors located above the carina to dissect upper mediastinal and cervical lymph nodes; however, the Ivor Lewis procedure offers perioperative and oncological safety for tumors located under the carina. An individualized treatment strategy for selecting the optimal reconstruction procedure can be proposed in future studies based on oncological and patient risk factors considering mid‐ to long‐term quality of life. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-05-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10319624/ /pubmed/37416735 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ags3.12685 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of The Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Review Articles Booka, Eisuke Takeuchi, Hiroya Morita, Yoshifumi Hiramatsu, Yoshihiro Kikuchi, Hirotoshi What is the best reconstruction procedure after esophagectomy? A meta‐analysis comparing posterior mediastinal and retrosternal approaches |
title | What is the best reconstruction procedure after esophagectomy? A meta‐analysis comparing posterior mediastinal and retrosternal approaches |
title_full | What is the best reconstruction procedure after esophagectomy? A meta‐analysis comparing posterior mediastinal and retrosternal approaches |
title_fullStr | What is the best reconstruction procedure after esophagectomy? A meta‐analysis comparing posterior mediastinal and retrosternal approaches |
title_full_unstemmed | What is the best reconstruction procedure after esophagectomy? A meta‐analysis comparing posterior mediastinal and retrosternal approaches |
title_short | What is the best reconstruction procedure after esophagectomy? A meta‐analysis comparing posterior mediastinal and retrosternal approaches |
title_sort | what is the best reconstruction procedure after esophagectomy? a meta‐analysis comparing posterior mediastinal and retrosternal approaches |
topic | Review Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10319624/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37416735 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ags3.12685 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bookaeisuke whatisthebestreconstructionprocedureafteresophagectomyametaanalysiscomparingposteriormediastinalandretrosternalapproaches AT takeuchihiroya whatisthebestreconstructionprocedureafteresophagectomyametaanalysiscomparingposteriormediastinalandretrosternalapproaches AT moritayoshifumi whatisthebestreconstructionprocedureafteresophagectomyametaanalysiscomparingposteriormediastinalandretrosternalapproaches AT hiramatsuyoshihiro whatisthebestreconstructionprocedureafteresophagectomyametaanalysiscomparingposteriormediastinalandretrosternalapproaches AT kikuchihirotoshi whatisthebestreconstructionprocedureafteresophagectomyametaanalysiscomparingposteriormediastinalandretrosternalapproaches |