Anastomotic Leaks following Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The Key Is the Multidisciplinary Management
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Publication Date: | 2023 |
Other Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | eng |
Source: | Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
Download full: | http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000100038 |
Summary: | Abstract Introduction: Anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy is associated with high mortality and impaired quality of life. Aim: The objective of this work was to determine the effec-tiveness of management of esophageal anastomotic leakage (EAL) after esophagectomy for esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. Methods: Patients submitted to esophagectomy for esophageal and GEJ cancer at a tertiary oncology hospital between 2014 and 2019 (n = 119) were retrospectively reviewed and EAL risk factors and its management outcomes determined. Results: Older age and nodal disease were identified as independent risk factors for anastomotic leak (adjusted OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00-1.13, and adjusted OR 4.89, 95% CI 1.09-21.8). Patients with EAL spent more days in the intensive care unit (ICU; median 14 vs. 4 days) and had higher 30-day mortality (15 vs. 2%) and higher in-hospital mortality (35 vs. 4%). The first treatment option was surgical in 13 patients, endoscopic in 10, and conservative in 3. No significant differences were noticeable between these patients, but sepsis and large leakages were tendentially managed by surgery. At follow-up, 3 patients in the surgery group (23%) and 9 in the endoscopic group (90%) were discharged under an oral diet (p = 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate was 38% in the surgical group, 33% in the conservative group, and 10% in endoscopic group (p = 0.132). In patients with EAL, the presence of septic shock at leak diagnosis was the only predictor of mortality (p = 0.004). ICU length-of-stay was non-significantly lower in the endoscopic therapy group (median 4 days, vs. 16 days in the surgical group, p = 0.212). Conclusion: Risk factors for EAL may help change pre-procedural optimization. The results of this study suggest including an endoscopic approach for EAL. |
id |
RCAP_e526a9e5711a173df3a2bcb95680ea11 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S2341-45452023000100038 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
repository_id_str |
https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160 |
spelling |
Anastomotic Leaks following Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The Key Is the Multidisciplinary ManagementEsophageal cancerEsophagectomyAnastomotic leakageEndoscopic treatmentAbstract Introduction: Anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy is associated with high mortality and impaired quality of life. Aim: The objective of this work was to determine the effec-tiveness of management of esophageal anastomotic leakage (EAL) after esophagectomy for esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. Methods: Patients submitted to esophagectomy for esophageal and GEJ cancer at a tertiary oncology hospital between 2014 and 2019 (n = 119) were retrospectively reviewed and EAL risk factors and its management outcomes determined. Results: Older age and nodal disease were identified as independent risk factors for anastomotic leak (adjusted OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00-1.13, and adjusted OR 4.89, 95% CI 1.09-21.8). Patients with EAL spent more days in the intensive care unit (ICU; median 14 vs. 4 days) and had higher 30-day mortality (15 vs. 2%) and higher in-hospital mortality (35 vs. 4%). The first treatment option was surgical in 13 patients, endoscopic in 10, and conservative in 3. No significant differences were noticeable between these patients, but sepsis and large leakages were tendentially managed by surgery. At follow-up, 3 patients in the surgery group (23%) and 9 in the endoscopic group (90%) were discharged under an oral diet (p = 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate was 38% in the surgical group, 33% in the conservative group, and 10% in endoscopic group (p = 0.132). In patients with EAL, the presence of septic shock at leak diagnosis was the only predictor of mortality (p = 0.004). ICU length-of-stay was non-significantly lower in the endoscopic therapy group (median 4 days, vs. 16 days in the surgical group, p = 0.212). Conclusion: Risk factors for EAL may help change pre-procedural optimization. The results of this study suggest including an endoscopic approach for EAL.Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia2023-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000100038GE-Portuguese Journal of Gastroenterology v.30 n.1 2023reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAPenghttp://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000100038Ortigão,RaquelPereira,BrigitteSilva,RuiPimentel-Nunes,PedroBastos,PedroSousa,Joaquim Abreu deFaria,FilomenaDinis-Ribeiro,MárioLibânio,Diogoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-02-06T17:34:22Zoai:scielo:S2341-45452023000100038Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-28T13:21:11.714722Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Anastomotic Leaks following Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The Key Is the Multidisciplinary Management |
title |
Anastomotic Leaks following Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The Key Is the Multidisciplinary Management |
spellingShingle |
Anastomotic Leaks following Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The Key Is the Multidisciplinary Management Ortigão,Raquel Esophageal cancer Esophagectomy Anastomotic leakage Endoscopic treatment |
title_short |
Anastomotic Leaks following Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The Key Is the Multidisciplinary Management |
title_full |
Anastomotic Leaks following Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The Key Is the Multidisciplinary Management |
title_fullStr |
Anastomotic Leaks following Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The Key Is the Multidisciplinary Management |
title_full_unstemmed |
Anastomotic Leaks following Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The Key Is the Multidisciplinary Management |
title_sort |
Anastomotic Leaks following Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The Key Is the Multidisciplinary Management |
author |
Ortigão,Raquel |
author_facet |
Ortigão,Raquel Pereira,Brigitte Silva,Rui Pimentel-Nunes,Pedro Bastos,Pedro Sousa,Joaquim Abreu de Faria,Filomena Dinis-Ribeiro,Mário Libânio,Diogo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Pereira,Brigitte Silva,Rui Pimentel-Nunes,Pedro Bastos,Pedro Sousa,Joaquim Abreu de Faria,Filomena Dinis-Ribeiro,Mário Libânio,Diogo |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Ortigão,Raquel Pereira,Brigitte Silva,Rui Pimentel-Nunes,Pedro Bastos,Pedro Sousa,Joaquim Abreu de Faria,Filomena Dinis-Ribeiro,Mário Libânio,Diogo |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Esophageal cancer Esophagectomy Anastomotic leakage Endoscopic treatment |
topic |
Esophageal cancer Esophagectomy Anastomotic leakage Endoscopic treatment |
description |
Abstract Introduction: Anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy is associated with high mortality and impaired quality of life. Aim: The objective of this work was to determine the effec-tiveness of management of esophageal anastomotic leakage (EAL) after esophagectomy for esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. Methods: Patients submitted to esophagectomy for esophageal and GEJ cancer at a tertiary oncology hospital between 2014 and 2019 (n = 119) were retrospectively reviewed and EAL risk factors and its management outcomes determined. Results: Older age and nodal disease were identified as independent risk factors for anastomotic leak (adjusted OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00-1.13, and adjusted OR 4.89, 95% CI 1.09-21.8). Patients with EAL spent more days in the intensive care unit (ICU; median 14 vs. 4 days) and had higher 30-day mortality (15 vs. 2%) and higher in-hospital mortality (35 vs. 4%). The first treatment option was surgical in 13 patients, endoscopic in 10, and conservative in 3. No significant differences were noticeable between these patients, but sepsis and large leakages were tendentially managed by surgery. At follow-up, 3 patients in the surgery group (23%) and 9 in the endoscopic group (90%) were discharged under an oral diet (p = 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate was 38% in the surgical group, 33% in the conservative group, and 10% in endoscopic group (p = 0.132). In patients with EAL, the presence of septic shock at leak diagnosis was the only predictor of mortality (p = 0.004). ICU length-of-stay was non-significantly lower in the endoscopic therapy group (median 4 days, vs. 16 days in the surgical group, p = 0.212). Conclusion: Risk factors for EAL may help change pre-procedural optimization. The results of this study suggest including an endoscopic approach for EAL. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-02-01 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000100038 |
url |
http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000100038 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000100038 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
GE-Portuguese Journal of Gastroenterology v.30 n.1 2023 reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
collection |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
info@rcaap.pt |
_version_ |
1833593689206685696 |