Hand-sewn versus stapled anastomoses for esophagectomy: We will probably never know which is better

OBJECTIVE: Esophagectomy remains the mainstay of treatment for nonmetastatic esophageal cancer. The optimal technique for anastomosis after esophagectomy remains unknown. The purpose of this systematic meta-analysis is to combine the available high-quality evidence to provide esophageal surgeons with an evidence base for their decision making. METHODS: A systematic search of multiple databases was conducted to find randomized controlled trials of esophageal anastomotic techniques. A meta-analysis of the pooled data was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies with 2123 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis revealed a 102% higher incidence of anastomotic leak after hand-sewn anastomosis compared with stapled anastomosis (odds ratio [OR], 2.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48-2.75). Anastomotic stricture rate was also 31% higher with hand-sewn anastomosis (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.00-1.7). Thirty-day mortality did not show statistical difference favoring one anastomosis technique to another (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45-1.04). None of anastomotic leak rate, anastomotic stricture rate, or 30-day overall survival differed between anastomotic techniques in studies with only thoracic anastomoses. In cervical position hand-sewn anastomosis was associated with higher rate of anastomotic leak (OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.33-3.05) and stricture (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.15-2.72), but no difference in 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis showed a signal of higher rate of leak and stricture in hand-sewn anastomoses, but sensitivity analyses did not show a consistent outcome, so these results should be interpreted with caution.