Esophageal cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in China. The comprehensive treatment of esophageal cancer based on operation is important. In recent ten years, with the development of surgical techniques and medical instruments, tubular stomach has been widely used. Although the advantages of tubular stomach are becoming more and more obvious, there are still many details and problems for the function and application of tubular stomach worthy of further discussion and study. In this paper, the technical progress, advantages, functions and applications of tubular stomach are reviewed and discussed, and the future prospect is predicted.
Objective To compare the outcome of tubular stomach and cervical esophagus laminated anastomosis and mechanical anastomosis. Methods A total of 128 patients with middle and upper esophageal cancer in our hospital from January 2013 to January 2016 were randomly divided into two groups, 64 patients in each group and all patients underwent esophagectomy. In the group A, there were 46 males and 18 females with age of 40–75 years, treated with tubular stomach and cervical esophagus layered anastomosis. There were 51 males and 13 females with age of 43–71 years in the group B receiving mechanical anastomosis. We observed the short-term and long-term efficacy as well as complications. Results In the group A, there was cervical anastomotic fistula in 1 patient, anastomotic stenosis in 2 patients and reflux esophagitis in 12 patients. In the group B, 1 patient suffered chylothorax, 8 patients cervical anastomotic fistula, 4 patients anastomotic stenosis and 14 patients reflux esophagitis. Conclusion Layered anastomosis can effectively reduce the incidence of anastomotic fistula and stenosis. Tubular stomach can effectively prevent and reduce the reflux esophagitis, and the high long-term quality of life will be achieved after the operation.
Abstract： Objective To investigate the clinical application of tubular stomach in cervical esophageal reconstruction after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Methods A total of 850 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy through cervico-thoraco-abdominal（3-field）approach between January 2007 and January 2009 in North Jiangsu Hospital were allocated into the tubular stomach group（group A, n=425） and the whole stomach group （group B, n=425）by operation order. Group A included 287 male and 138 female patients with their average age of 58.2±11.5 years. Among them, 27 patients had upper esophageal cancer, 346 patients had middle esophageal cancer and 52 patients had lower esophageal cancer. Group B included 298 male and 127 female patients with their average age of 58.5±12.8 years. Among them, 33 patients had upper esophageal cancer, 338 patients had middle esophageal cancer, and 54 patients had lower esophageal cancer. Operation time, postoperative length of hospital stay and the incidence of anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, intra-thoracic stomach syndrome and reflux esophagitis of the two groups were compared. Results All the patients recovered uneventfully with no in-hospital death. There was no statistical difference in operation time （175.0±12.8 min vs.171.0±10.5 min，t=1.702，P＞ 0.05）and postoperative length of hospital stay （16.0±8.5 d vs.16.3±8.8 d，t=1.773，P＞ 0.05） between the two groups. During follow-up of six months, the rates of anastomotic leakage（χ2=5.550，P＜ 0.05）, intra-thoracic stomach syndrome （χ2=10.500，P＜ 0.05）and reflux esophagitis（χ2=9.150，P＜ 0.05） of group A were significantly lower than those of group B. There was no significant difference in the incidence of anastomotic stricture （χ2=0.120，P＞ 0.05） between the two groups. Conclusion Tubular stomach is better than whole stomach for cervical esophageal reconstruction after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer since it is more physiologically and anatomically complied. It can decrease the incidence of anastomotic leakage, intra-thoracic stomach syndrome, reflux esophagitis and improve the postoperative quality of life.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the complications and quality of life (QoL) in patients with esophageal cancer after esophagectomy using gastric tube. MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) about the postoperative complications and QoL of patients using gastric tube and the whole stomach reconstruction were electronically searched in PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Knowledge, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data from inception to September 30th, 2013. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 10 RCTs involving 1 085 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, in terms of postoperative complications, the incidences of reflux esophagitis (OR=0.19, 95%CI 0.12 to 0.32, P < 0.000 01) and intrathoracic stomach syndrome (OR=0.11, 95%CI 0.04 to 0.32, P < 0.000 1) with gastric tube were significantly lower than those of the whole stomach; in terms of QoL, the scores of QoL in the 6th month (MD=18.71, 95%CI 7.72 to 29.71, P=0.000 9) and in the 12th month (MD=22.95, 95%CI 8.21 to 37.69, P=0.002) with gastric tube were significantly higher than those of the whole stomach. In terms of satisfaction degree of QoL, the satisfaction degree of QoL in the 6th month (OR=1.78, 95%CI 1.10 to 2.88, P=0.02) and the 12th month (OR=2.73, 95%CI 1.67 to 4.47, P < 0.000 1) with gastric tube were both significantly higher than those of the whole stomach. ConclusionCompared with the whole stomach reconstruction, the method of gastric tube reconstruction has beneficial effects in reducing the incidences of postoperative complications (such as reflux esophagitis, intrathoracic stomach syndrome) and improves patients' QoL. But there are many uncertain factors about postoperative anastomotic complication and its influence on patients' long-term QoL remains uncertain. Thus, further studies should be conducted.
Using gastric tube to replace the esophagus has been widely used in esophagectomy. This surgical method is gradually replacing the traditional stomach reconstruction. Its advantages in the incidence of postoperative complication, the quality of life and the long-time survival in clinic have proved to be true. Although using tubular stomach in esophagectomy has become the consensus of experts, some details still need some further discussing and this technique should be gradually improved in future. In this review, the superiority and the technical progress of gastric tube are introduced, and we predict the future of tubular stomach and discuss the existed problems.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy of tubular stomach and whole stomach reconstruction in the treatment of esophageal cancer.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP and CBM databases to collect the randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies on the efficacy comparison between tubular stomach and total gastric reconstruction of esophagus in esophagectomy from their date of inception to May 2019. Then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of Twenty-nine RCTs were included, and 3 012 patients were involved. The results of meta-analysis showed that the postoperative complications such as anastomotic fistula [RR=0.64, 95%CI (0.50, 0.83), P=0.000 6], anastomotic stenosis [RR=0.65, 95%CI (0.50, 0.86), P=0.002], thoracic gastric syndrome [RR=0.19, 95%CI (0.13, 0.27), P<0.001], reflux esophagitis [RR=0.23, 95%CI (0.19, 0.30), P<0.001], gastric emptying disorder [RR=0.39, 95%CI (0.27, 0.57), P<0.001] and pulmonary infection [RR=0.44, 95%CI (0.31, 0.62), P<0.001] were significantly reduced, and the postoperative quality of life score and satisfaction were higher at 6 months and 1 year in the tubular stomach group (P<0.05). In terms of intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay, they were better in the tubular stomach group than those in the whole stomach group (P<0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in operation time, postoperative gastrointestinal decompression time, postoperative closed drainage time, postoperative 1-year, 2-year and 3-year survival rate, postoperative quality of life score at 3 weeks and 3 months, and postoperative life satisfaction at 3 weeks.ConclusionThe tubular stomach is more advantageous than the whole stomach in the reconstruction of esophagus after esophagectomy.
Objective To compare short-term quality of life and postoperative complications in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients with different routes reconstruction after McKeown esophagectomy. Methods The clinical data of 144 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who received McKeown esophagectomy in Shanghai Chest Hospital from January 2016 to October 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Among them 93 patients accepted retrosternal approach (a RR group, 71 males and 22 females at an average age of 63.5±7.7 years) and 51 patients accepted posterior mediastinal approach (a PR group, 39 males and 12 females at an average age of 62.3±8.0 years). Short-term surgical outcomes were compared and a Quality of Life Questionnaire of Patients Underwent Esophagectomy 1.0 was performed at postoperative 1st and 3rd month. Results There was no difference in two groups in sex, age, Body Mass Index (BMI), and location and clinical stage of tumors (P>0.05). The neoadjuvant therapy was more performed in the RR group (16.1%vs. 5.9%, P=0.075). There were more robot-assisted esophagecctomy operations performed in the PR group (52.9% vs. 45.2%, P=0.020). No significant difference was noted in operation duration, intraoperative blood loss or length of ICU stay between the RR and PR groups (251.3±59.1 min vs. 253.1±27.7 min, P=0.862; 223.7±75.1 ml vs. 240.0±75.1 ml, P=0.276; 3.7±6.6 d vs. 2.3±2.1 d, P=0.139). The patients in the PR group had more lymph nodes dissected and shorter hospital stay (P<0.001). Rate of R1/2 resection was higher in the RR group (12.9%vs. 5.9%, P=0.187). No surgery-related mortality was observed in both groups. The anastomotic leak and the anastomotic stricture was higher in the RR group than that in the PR group (25.8% vs. 5.9%, P=0.003). No significant difference was found between the two groups in the quality of life at postoperative 1st and 3rd month. However, the quality of life at postoperative 3rd month significantly improved in both groups (P<0.001). Compared with the PR group, the dysphagia was more severe in the RR group at postoperative 1st month (3.3±1.5 vs. 2.6±1.1, P=0.007), while the reflux symptom was lighter at postoperative 3rd month (3.0±1.8 vs. 3.6±1.6, P=0.045). Conclusion The two different routes reconstruction after McKeown esophagectomy are both safe and feasible. The anterior mediastinal approach increases the risk of anastomotic leak, but with low incidence of reflux symptom.
Objective To summarize the experiences of applying gastric tube in minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), in order to assess its feasibility and safety. [WTHZ]Methods From June 2004 to August 2009, MIE was performed on 102 patients with esophageal carcinoma, including 71 males and 31 females whose age ranged from 37 to 79 years old with an average age of 61.1. Among them, 62 patients underwent thoracoscopic laparotomy 3-incision esophagectomy, 35 patients underwent thoracoscopic and laparoscopic 3-incision esophagectomy and 5 patients underwent thoracotomy and laparoscopic esophagectomy. Prevertebral reconstruction was performed on 58 patients and retrosternal reconstruction was performed on 44 patients. [WTHZ]Results All operations were performed successfully with a perioperative mortality rate of 2.0%(2/102) and a postoperative complication rate of 41.2%(42/102). The complications included anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture and lung infection. The complication rate was higher in the retrosternal group than in the prevertebral group (56.8% vs. 29.3%, Plt;0.05). Anastomotic leakage rate in the retrosternal group was also higher than that in the prevertebral group (34.1% vs. 6.9%, Plt;0.05). There was no significant difference in anastomotic stenosis, gastric fistula, dysfunction of gastric emptying, heart and lung complications, chylothorax and injury of recurrent laryngeal nerve between the two groups. [WTHZ]Conclusion Gastric tube is an effective way for reconstruction of the digestive tract after minimally invasive esophagectomy. The choice of prevertebral reconstruction or retrosternal reconstruction should be based on each individual patient.