Castellanos GJA, Mederos CON, Barrera OJC, Romero DCA, Adefna PRI, Leal MA

Language: Spanish
References: 30
Page: 1-16
PDF size: 465.71 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Anastomotic leak is the main complication of esophageal surgery, with high incidence and mortality rates.
Objective: To identify the factors involved in the appearance of anastomotic leak in patients operated on for esophageal cancer in Cuba in the period from 1988 to 2020.
Methods: A nonrandomized, multicenter, clinical-epidemiological and observational investigation was carried out in the period from 1988 to 2020. The universe and the sample consisted of 2844 and 595 patients from nine hospital centers. Some of the variables studied included sex, age, histological variety, surgical intervention performed, comorbidities, and their interrelation with anastomotic leak.
Results: Anastomotic leak prevailed in the group aged over 55 years (17.8%), in the female sex (65; 10.9%), in nonsmokers (79; 13.3%) and in those who did not ingest alcoholic beverages (100, 16.8%); as well as in patients with normal albumin levels (98; 16.5%), with low proteins (94; 15.7%) and with normal levels of hemoglobin (105; 17.6%). In the histological variety of adenocarcinoma (65; 10.9%), there was a predominance of the transhiatal surgical technique (69; 11.6%), performed manually (123; 20.7%), of cervical location (111; 18.6%), in the anterior face (57; 9.6%), in one plane (78; 13.1%), and in the termino-lateral variant (120; 20.2%).
Conclusions: Anastomotic leak prevailed in women aged over 50 years, with adenocarcinoma, operated on through transhiatal techniques, manually, in one plane, using the termino-lateral variant, in the anterior face and with hypoproteinemia.

REFERENCES

1. Naciones Unidas. La Agenda 2030 y los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible: una oportunidad para América Latina y el Caribe. Santiago; 2018.

2. Cintra Brooks ST, Pérez AC, Cintra Pérez S. Cáncer de esófago. Revisión actualizada. Rev Inf Cient. 2016 [acceso 25/07/2019];95(4):635-46. Disponible en: http://www.revinfcientifica.sld.cu/index.php/ric/article/view/97/2294

3. Italo Braghetto M, Gonzalo Cardemil H, Attila Csendes J, Enrique Lanzarini S, MaherMushle K, Francisco Venturelli M, et al. Resultados de la cirugía actual para el tratamiento del cancer de esofago. Rev Chil Cir. 2016 [acceso 26/07/2019]68(1). Disponible en: https://scielo.conicyt.cl/scielo

4. Chadi SA, Fingerhut A, Berho M, DeMeester SR, Fleshman JW, Hyman NH, et al. Emerging trends in the etiology, prevention, and treatment of gastrointestinal anastomotic leakage. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20:2035-51.

5. Mishra PK, Shah H, Gupta N, Varshney V, Patil NS, Jain A, et al. Stapled versus handsewn cervical esophagogastric anastomosis in patients undergoing esophagectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Annals of Medicine and Surgery. 2016;5:118-24.

6. Sugimura K, Miyata H, Matsunaga T, Asukai K, Yanagimoto Y, Takahashi Y, et al. 15 Comparison of the modified Collard and hand-sewn anastomosis for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients: A propensity score-matched analysis. Annals of gastroenterological surgery. 2019;3(1):104-13.

7. Ishibashi Y, Fukunaga T, Mikami S, Oka S, Kanda S, Yube Y, et al. Triple-stapled quadrilateral anastomosis: a new technique for creation of an esophagogastric anastomosis. Esophagus. 2018;15(2):88-94.

8. Zhou D, Liu Q-X, Deng X-F, Min J-X, Dai J-G. Comparison of two different mechanical esophagogastric anastomosis in esophageal cancer patients: a meta-analysis. Journal of cardiothoracic surgery. 2015;10(1):67.

9. Messager M, Warlaumont M, Renaud F, Marin H, Branche J, Piessen G, et al. Recent improvements in the management of esophageal anastomotic leak after surgery for cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017;43(2):258-69.

10. Low DE, Alderson D, Cecconello I, Chang AC, Darling GE, D'Journo XB, et al. International consensus on standardization of data collection for complications associated with esophagectomy: Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG). Ann Surg. 2015;262(2):286-9.

11. Van Workum F, Rosman C. Treatment of Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy (TENTACLE study). U.S. National Libray of Medicine. 2019 [acceso 20/9/2019]:1(3). Disponible en: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03829098

12. Gooszen JAH, Goense L, Gisbertz SS, Ruurda JP, van Hillegersberg R, van Berge Henegouwen MI, et al. Intrathoracic versus cervical anastomosis and predictors of anastomotic leakage after oesophagectomy for cancer. Br J Surg. 2018;105(5):552-60.

13. Shuto K, Kono T, Akutsu Y, Uesato M, Mori M, Matsuo K, et al. Naso-esophageal extraluminal drainage for postoperative anastomotic leak after thoracic esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30(3):1-9.

14. van Rossum PS, Haverkamp L, Carvello M, Ruurda JP, van Hillegersberg R. Management and outcome of cervical versus intrathoracic manifestation of cervical anastomotic leakage after transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30(1):1-8.

15. Dent B. Management and outcomes of anastomotic leaks after oesophagectomy. Br J Surg. 2016;103(8):1033-8.

16. Low DE. Benchmarking complications associated with esophagectomy. Ann Surg. 2019;269(2):291-8.

17. Goense L. Impact of postoperative complications on outcomes after oesophagectomy for cancer. Br J Surg. 2019;06(1):111-9.

18. Booka E. The impact of postoperative complications on survivals after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Medicinem. 2015;94(33):1369.

19. Leal MA, Rivas TO, Mederos CO, Díaz MM, Bernot RD. Tratamiento quirúrgico del cáncer de esófago. Revisión estadística de 1970 hasta 1986. Rev Cub Cir. 1988;27(6):23-30.

20. Ferrá A, Martín MA. Resultados obtenidos con el tratamiento quirúrgico en el cáncer esofágico. Rev Cub Cir. 2003;42(3):18-26.

21. Markar S. The impact of severe anastomotic leak on long-term survival and cancer recurrence after surgical resection for esophageal malignancy. Ann Surg. 2015;262(6):972-80.

22. Urschel JD, Blewett CJ, Bennett WF. Handsewn or stapled esophagogastric anastomoses after esophagectomy for cancer: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Dis. Esophagus. 2021;14:212e217.

23. Orringer MB, Marshall MD. Iannettoni, Transhiatal esophagectomy: clinical experience and refinements. Ann. Surg. 1999;230:392e403.

24. Vasallo JA, Correa P, De Stéfani E, Cendán M, Zavala D, Chen V, el al. Esophageal cancer in Uruguay: a case-control study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1985;75(6):1005-9.

25. Harustiak T, Pazdro A, Snajdauf M, Stolz A, Lischke R. Anastomotic leak and stricture after hand-sewn versus linear-stapled intrathoracic oesophagogastric anastomosis: single-centre analysis of 415 oesophagectomies. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. 2016;49(6):1650-9.

26. Wang Q, He XR, Shi CH, Tian JH, Jiang L, He SL, et al. Hand-sewn versus stapled esophagogastric anastomosis in the neck: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Indian Journal of Surgery. 2015;77(2):133-40.

27. Deng XF, Liu QX, Zhou D, Min JX, Dai JG. Hand-sewn vs linearly stapled esophagogastric anastomosis for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21:4757-64.

28. Sjoerd ML, Bart CV, Laurents PSS, Jan B, Van L. Evidence-Based Surgical Treatment of Esophageal Cancer: Overview of High-Quality Studies "Cervical or Thoracic Anastomosis?" Ann Thorac Surg. 2010;89:1319-26.

29. Liu QX, Qiu Y, Deng XF, Min JX, Dai JG. Comparison of outcomes following end-to-end hand-sewn and mechanical oesophagogastric anastomosis after oesophagectomy for carcinoma: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;47:e118-23.

30. Mederos Curbelo ON, Barreras Ortega JC, Romero Díaz C, Menchaca Díaz JL, Cantero Ronquillo A. Bypass gástrico tubular isoperistáltico (Postlethwait) en el cáncer de esófago irresecable. Rev Cub Oncol. 2001;17(2):135-7.