Post-esophagectomy gastric outlet obstruction: role of pyloromyotomy and management with endoscopic pyloric dilatation

Management of Major Complications After Esophagectomy

Esophagectomy remains a procedure with one of the highest complication rates. Given the advances in medical and surgical management of patients and increased patient survival, the number of complications reported has increased. There are different grading systems for complications which vary based on severity or organ system, with the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group unifying them. Management involves conservative intervention and dietary modification to endoscopic interventions and surgical reintervention. Treatment is etiology specific but rehabilitation and patient optimization play a significant role in managing these complications by preventing them. Management is a step-up approach depending on the severity of symptoms.

Anterior gastric wall anastomosis may lead to lower rate of delayed gastric emptying after minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: a retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

In minimally invasive esophagectomy, a circular stapled anastomosis is common, but no evidence exists investigating the role of the specific localization of the anastomosis. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of an esophagogastrostomy on the anterior or posterior wall of the gastric conduit on the postoperative outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All oncologic minimally invasive Ivor Lewis procedures, performed between 2017 and 2022, were included in this study. The cohort was divided in two groups: a) intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy on the anterior gastric wall of the conduit (ANT, n = 285, 65%) and b) on the posterior gastric wall (POST, n = 154, 35%). Clinicopathological parameters and short-term outcomes were compared between both groups by retrieving data from the prospective database.

RESULTS

Overall, 439 patients were included, baseline characteristics were similar in both groups, there was a higher proportion of squamous cell carcinoma in ANT (22.8% vs. 16.2%, P = 0.043). A higher rate of robotic-assisted procedures was observed in ANT (71.2% vs. 49.4%). Anastomotic leakage rate was similar in both groups (ANT 10.4% vs. POST 9.8%, P = 0.851). Overall complication rate and Clavien-Dindo > 3 complication rates were higher in POST compared to ANT: 53.2% vs. 40% (P = 0.008) and 36.9% vs. 25.7% (P = 0.014), respectively. The rate of delayed gastric emptying (20.1% vs. 7.4%, P < 0.001) and nosocomial pneumonia (22.1% vs. 14.8%, P = 0.05) was significantly higher in POST.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with an intrathoracic circular stapled anastomosis may benefit from esophagogastrostomy on the anterior wall of the gastric conduit, in terms of lower rate of delayed gastric emptying.

Omission of intraoperative pyloric procedures in minimally invasive esophagectomy: assessing the impact on patients

Pyloroplasty or pyloromyotomy is often undertaken during esophagectomy to aid gastric emptying postoperatively. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) frequently omits a pyloric procedure. The impact on perioperative outcomes and the need for subsequent interventions is unclear. This study assesses the requirements for endoscopic balloon dilation of the pylorus (EPD) following MIE. Patients undergoing MIE from 2016 to 2020 were reviewed. Patients undergoing open resection, or an intraoperative pyloric procedure were excluded. Demographic, clinical and pathological data were reviewed. Univariable and multivariable analysis were performed as appropriate. In total, 171 patients underwent MIE. There were no differences in age (median 65 vs. 65 years, P = 0.6), pathological stage (P = 0.10) or ASA status (P = 0.52) between those requiring and not requiring endoscopic pyloric dilation (EPD). Forty-three patients (25%) required EPD, with a total of 71 procedures. Twenty-seven patients (16%) had EPD on their index admission. Seventy-five patients (43%) had a postoperative complication. Higher ASA status was associated with increased requirement for EPD (odds ratio 10.8, P = 0.03). On multivariable analysis, there was no association between the need for a pyloric procedure and overall survival (P = 0.14). Eight patients (5%) required insertion of a feeding jejunostomy in the postoperative period, with no difference between those with or without EPD (P = 0.11). Two patients required subsequent surgical pyloromyotomy for delayed gastric emptying. Although pyloroplasty or pyloromyotomy can safely be excluded during MIE, a quarter of patients will require postoperative EPD procedures. The impact of excluding pyloric procedures on gastric emptying requires further study.

Are intra-operative gastric drainage procedures necessary in esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Surgical pyloroplasty or pyloromyotomy are often performed during esophagectomy with a view of improving gastric conduit drainage. However, the clinical importance of this is not clear, and some centers opt to omit this step. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the rates of pulmonary complications, anastomotic leak, mortality, delayed gastric emptying, and the need for further pyloric intervention, in patients undergoing esophagectomy with and without a drainage procedure.

METHODS

A database search of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library was performed to identify randomized control trials and cohort studies published between 2000 and 2020 which compared outcomes of esophagectomy with and without drainage procedures. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to compare the rates of pulmonary complications, anastomotic leak, mortality, delayed gastric emptying, and the need for further pyloric intervention.

RESULTS

Three randomized and 12 non-randomized publications were identified, comprising a total of 2339 patients. No significant differences were found between the two groups with regard to pulmonary complications (RR 1.02 [95% CI, 0.78-1.33], p = 0.91), anastomotic leak (RR 1.14 [95% CI, 0.80-1.62], p = 0.48), mortality (RR 0.53 [95% CI, 0.23-1.26], p = 0.15), delayed gastric emptying (RR 0.98 [95% CI, 0.59-1.62], p = 0.93), and the need for further pyloric intervention (RR 1.99 [95% CI, 0.56-7.08], p = 0.29).

CONCLUSION

Where post-operative pyloric treatment is available on demand, surgical pyloric drainage procedures may not have any significant clinical impact on patient outcomes for patients undergoing esophagectomy, though further good-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this.

Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Esophagus

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is common in the developing world with decreasing incidence in developed countries and carries significant morbidity and mortality. Major risk factors for ESCC development include significant use of alcohol and tobacco. Screening for ESCC can be recommended in high-risk populations living in highly endemic regions. The treatment of ESCC ranges from endoscopic resection therapy or surgery in localized disease to chemoradiotherapy in metastatic disease, and prognosis is directly related to the stage at diagnosis. New immunotherapies and molecular targeted therapies may improve the dismal survival outcomes in patients with metastatic ESCC.

There is no correlation between a delayed gastric conduit emptying and the occurrence of an anastomotic leakage after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy

INTRODUCTION

Esophagectomy is the gold standard in the surgical therapy of esophageal cancer. It is either performed thoracoabdominal with a intrathoracic anastomosis or in proximal cancers with a three-incision esophagectomy and cervical reconstruction. Delayed gastric conduit emptying (DGCE) is the most common functional postoperative disorder after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (IL). Pneumonia is significantly more often in patients with DGCE. It remains unclear if DGCE anastomotic leakage (AL) is associated. Aim of our study is to analyze, if AL is more likely to happen in patients with a DGCE.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

816 patients were included. All patients have had an IL due to esophageal/esophagogastric-junction cancer between 2013 and 2018 in our center. Intrathoracic esophagogastric end-to-side anastomosis was performed with a circular stapling device. The collective has been divided in two groups depending on the occurrence of DGCE. The diagnosis DGCE was determined by clinical and radiologic criteria in accordance with current international expert consensus.

RESULTS

27.7% of all patients suffered from DGCE postoperatively. Female patients had a significantly higher chance to suffer from DGCE than male patients (34.4% vs. 26.2% vs., p = 0.040). Pneumonia was more common in patients with DGCE (13.7% vs. 8.5%, p = 0.025), furthermore hospitalization was longer in DGCE patients (median 17 days vs. 14d, p < 0.001). There was no difference in the rate of type II anastomotic leakage, (5.8% in both groups DGCE). All patients with ECCG type II AL (n = 47; 5.8%) were treated successfully by endoluminal/endoscopic therapy. The subgroup analysis showed that ASA ≥ III (7.6% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.05) and the histology squamous cell carcinoma (9.8% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.01) were independent risk factors for the occurrence of an AL.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirms that DGCE after IL is a common finding in a standardized collective of patients in a high-volume center. This functional disorder is associated with a higher rate of pneumonia and a prolonged hospital stay. Still, there is no association between DGCE and the occurrence of an AL after esophagectomy. The hypothesis, that an DGCE results in a higher pressure on the anastomosis and therefore to an AL in consequence, can be refuted. DGCE is not a pathogenetic factor for an AL.

Treating Early Delayed Gastric Tube Emptying after Esophagectomy with Pneumatic Pyloric Dilation

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic pneumatic pyloric balloon dilation is a treatment option for early postoperative delayed gastric tube emptying following esophageal resection. This study aimed to determine the safety and effectiveness of endoscopic balloon dilation.

METHODS

Between 2015 and 2018, patients with delayed gastric emptying 8-10 days after esophageal resection with gastric tube reconstruction due to esophageal carcinoma were considered for inclusion. Inclusion criteria were ≥1 of the following: nasogastric tube production ≥500 mL/24 h, ≥300 mL gastric retention, ≥50% gastric tube dilatation on X-ray, or nasogastric tube replacement. Patients were excluded on evidence of anastomotic leakage or reintervention. Success was defined as the ability to expand intake without needing to replace the nasogastric tube. Dilation was performed using a 30-mm Rigiflex balloon.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients underwent pyloric dilation, 12 according to the study protocol. Treatment was performed at a median of 12 days (IQR 9-15) postoperatively. Success was achieved in 58%. At 3 months, 8 patients progressed to exclusively oral intake. The remaining 4 patients had supplementary nightly enteral tube feeding. There were no adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic balloon dilation of the pylorus is a safe, feasible therapy for early postoperative delayed gastric emptying. With a success rate of 58%, a clinical trial is a necessary next step.

Minimally invasive oesophagectomy: The first case report of a thoracolaparoscopic oesophagectomy done in the Caribbean

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive oesophagectomy is one of the options in the armamentarium of a modern surgeon when faced with treating oesophageal cancer. Trinidad and Tobago has successfully treated a patient using this method. This case report adds to the rich surgical history in the Caribbean.

CASE PRESENTATION

Our patient presented with progressive dysphagia, and after being worked up was diagnosed with oesophageal cancer. He underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and had a minimally invasive McKeown oesophagectomy done by a fellowship trained, advanced laparoscopic oesophageal and gastric surgeon.

CONCLUSION

The patient had an uneventful recovery and was tumor free with excellent quality of life at 4 years, showing that the Caribbean is keeping up with the rest of the surgical world.

Effect of Pyloroplasty on Gastric Conduit Emptying and Patients' Quality of Life After Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy

Background: Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a common complication after esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction. It is still unclear whether a pyloric drainage procedure might reduce the risk of DGE. Methods: We identified in our database all patients subjected to Ivor Lewis esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in the period 2000-2012. In the period 2000-2009, we performed a routine pyloroplasty (pyloroplasty group, PP group, 15 patients), after 2009 we did not perform any type of pyloric drainage procedure (nonpyloroplasty group, NPP group, 11 patients). We compared the groups with subjective questionnaires to assess the perceived quality of life (QoL) (QLQ-C30 and OES-18) and with objective test to study the gastric tube emptying (timed barium swallow test, scintigraphy, 24 hours' pH-metry). Results: No difference was observed in questionnaires QLC-C30 and OES-18 scores: 73% of patients in PP group and 63% in NPP group scored their overall QoL as good to excellent (QLC-C30). We did not report difference in timed barium swallow test results and in scintigraphy results. Twenty-four-hour pH-metry results showed in PP group a nonsignificant higher number of acid reflux episodes (NPP group 23.2 ± 9.5 versus PP group 41.3 ± 10.7, P = .29) and a longer time with pH <4 (NPP group 0.89% ± 1.6% versus PP group 3.1% ± 2.1%, P = .24). Conclusions: In our series, pyloroplasty was not associated with improved long-term QoL nor with better gastric conduit emptying. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

The Optimal Pyloric Procedure: A Collective Review

Vagal damage and subsequent pyloric denervation inevitably occur during esophagectomy, potentially leading to delayed gastric emptying (DGE). The choice of an optimal pyloric procedure to overcome DGE is important, as such procedures can lead to prolonged surgery, shortening of the conduit, disruption of the blood supply, and gastric dumping/bile reflux. This study investigated various pyloric methods and analyzed comparative studies in order to determine the optimal pyloric procedure. Surgical procedures for the pylorus include pyloromyotomy, pyloroplasty, or digital fracture. Botulinum toxin injection, endoscopic balloon dilatation, and erythromycin are non-surgical procedures. The scope, technique, and effects of these procedures are changing due to advances in minimally invasive surgery and postoperative interventions. Some comparative studies have shown that pyloric procedures are helpful for DGE, while others have argued that it is difficult to reach an objective conclusion because of the variety of definitions of DGE and evaluation methods. In conclusion, recent advances in interventional technology and minimally invasive surgery have led to questions regarding the practice of pyloric procedures. However, many clinicians still perform them and they are at least somewhat effective. To provide guidance on the optimal pyloric procedure, DGE should first be defined clearly, and a large-scale study with an objective evaluation method will then be required.

Delayed Gastric Emptying after Esophagectomy: Management and Prevention

The quality of life associated with eating is becoming an increasingly significant problem for patients who undergo esophagectomy as a result of the improved survival rate after esophageal cancer surgery. Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a common complication after esophagectomy. Although several strategies have been proposed for the management and prevention of DGE, no clear consensus exists. The purpose of this review is to present a brief overview of DGE and to help clinicians choose the most appropriate treatment through an analysis of DGE by cause. Furthermore, we would like to suggest some tips to prevent DGE based on our experience.

Surgical Adjuncts During Esophagectomy

Esophagectomy is a major operation whereby intraoperative technique and postoperative care must be optimal. Even in expert hands, the complication rate is as high as 59%. Here the authors discuss the role of surgical adjuncts, including enteral access, nasogastric decompression, pyloric drainage procedures, and anastomotic buttressing as adjuncts to esophagectomy and whether they reduce perioperative complications.

Endoscopic Botulinum toxin as a treatment for delayed gastric emptying following oesophagogastrectomy

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of delayed gastric emptying (DGE) following oesophagogastrectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction is reported to be between 1.7% and 50%. This variation is due to differing practices of intraoperative pylorus drainage procedures, which increase the risk of postoperative biliary reflux and dumping syndrome, resulting in significant morbidity. The aim of our study was to establish rates of DGE in people undergoing oesophagogastrectomy without routine intraoperative drainage procedures, and to evaluate outcomes of postoperative endoscopically administered Botulinum toxin into the pylorus (EBP) for people with DGE resistant to systemic pharmacological treatment.

METHODS

All patients undergoing oesophagogastrectomy between 1 January 2016 and 31 March 2018 at our unit were included. No intraoperative pyloric drainage procedures were performed, and DGE resistant to systemic pharmacotherapy was managed with EBP.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven patients were included. Postoperatively, 29 patients (30%) were diagnosed with DGE resistant to pharmacotherapy. Of these, 16 (16.5%) were diagnosed within 30 days of surgery. The median pre-procedure nasogastric tube aspirate was 780ml; following EBP, this fell to 125ml (p<0.001). Median delay from surgery to EBP in this cohort was 13 days (IQR 7-16 days). Six patients required a second course of EBP, with 100% successful resolution of DGE before discharge. There were no procedural complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest series of patients without routine intraoperative drainage procedures. Only 30% of patients developed DGE resistant to pharmacotherapy, which was managed safely with EBP in the postoperative period, thus minimising the risk of biliary reflux in people who would otherwise be at risk following prophylactic pylorus drainage procedures.

Diagnostic criteria and symptom grading for delayed gastric conduit emptying after esophagectomy for cancer: international expert consensus based on a modified Delphi process

Delayed gastric conduit emptying (DGCE) after esophagectomy for cancer is associated with adverse outcomes and troubling symptoms. Widely accepted diagnostic criteria and a symptom grading tool for DGCE are missing. This hampers the interpretation and comparison of studies. A modified Delphi process, using repeated web-based questionnaires, combined with live interim group discussions was conducted by 33 experts within the field, from Europe, North America, and Asia. DGCE was divided into early DGCE if present within 14 days of surgery and late if present later than 14 days after surgery. The final criteria for early DGCE, accepted by 25 of 27 (93%) experts, were as follows: >500 mL diurnal nasogastric tube output measured on the morning of postoperative day 5 or later or >100% increased gastric tube width on frontal chest x-ray projection together with the presence of an air-fluid level. The final criteria for late DGCE accepted by 89% of the experts were as follows: the patient should have 'quite a bit' or 'very much' of at least two of the following symptoms; early satiety/fullness, vomiting, nausea, regurgitation or inability to meet caloric need by oral intake and delayed contrast passage on upper gastrointestinal water-soluble contrast radiogram or on timed barium swallow. A symptom grading tool for late DGCE was constructed grading each symptom as: 'not at all', 'a little', 'quite a bit', or 'very much', generating 0, 1, 2, or 3 points, respectively. For the five symptoms retained in the diagnostic criteria for late DGCE, the minimum score would be 0, and the maximum score would be 15. The final symptom grading tool for late DGCE was accepted by 27 of 31 (87%) experts. For the first time, diagnostic criteria for early and late DGCE and a symptom grading tool for late DGCE are available, based on an international expert consensus process.

Delayed emptying of the gastric conduit after esophagectomy

With increasing survival after esophagectomy for cancer, a growing number of individuals living with the functional results of a surgically altered anatomy calls for attention to the effects of delayed gastric conduit emptying (DGCE) on health-related quality of life and nutritional impairment. We here give an overview of the currently available literature on DGCE, in terms of epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnostics, prevention and treatment. Attention is given to controversies in the current literature and obstacles related to general applicability of study results, as well as knowledge gaps that may be the focus for future research initiatives. Finally, we propose that measures are taken to reach international expert agreement regarding diagnostic criteria and a symptom grading tool for DGCE, and that functional radiological methods are established for the diagnosis and severity grading of DGCE.

Management of delayed gastric conduit emptying after esophagectomy

Delayed gastric conduit emptying (DGE) is a common complication after esophagectomy. Currently, pyloric interventions are the major prevention and treatment for DGE. In this review, we attempt to evaluate the clinical effect and safety of different pyloric interventions in esophagectomy patients. Moreover, other important management of DGE, including size of esophageal substitute, erythromycin and nasogastric tube (NGT) will also be discussed.

Pylorus drainage procedures in thoracoabdominal esophagectomy - a single-center experience and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Pylorotomy and pyloroplasty in thoracoabdominal esophagectomy are routinely performed in many high-volume centers to prevent delayed gastric emptying (DGE) due to truncal vagotomy. Currently, controversy remains regarding the need for these practices. The present study aimed to determine the value and role of pyloric drainage procedures in esophagectomy with gastric replacement.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was performed for all consecutive patients who underwent thoracoabdominal resection of the esophagus between January 2009 and December 2016 at the Katharinenhospital in Stuttgart, Germany. Clinicopathologic features and surgical outcomes were evaluated with a focus on postoperative nutrition and gastric emptying.

RESULTS

The study group included 170 patients who underwent thoracoabdominal esophageal resection with a gastric conduit using the Ivor Lewis approach. The median age of the patients was 64 years. Most patients were male (81%), and most suffered from adenocarcinoma of the esophagus (75%). The median hospital stay was 20 days, and the 30-day hospital death rate was 2.9%. According to the department standard, pylorotomy, pyloroplasty, or other pyloric drainage procedures were not performed in any of the patients. Overall, 28/170 patients showed clinical signs of DGE (16.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

In the literature, the rate of DGE after thoracoabdominal esophagectomy is reported to be approximately 15%, even with the use of pyloric drainage procedures. This rate is comparable to that reported in the present series in which no pyloric drainage procedures were performed. Therefore, we believe that pyloric drainage procedures may be unwarranted in thoracoabdominal esophagectomy. However, future randomized trials are needed to ultimately confirm this supposition.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection to relieve a flexure of the gastric conduit after esophagectomy

Background and study aims  A 70-year-old-man underwent an esophagectomy and posterior mediastinal reconstruction for esophageal cancer that was curatively resected. Although the patient was allowed to eat after surgery, he repeatedly vomited after drinking water or eating meals and required continuous hospitalization. An upper gastrointestinal series and endoscopic examination revealed an obstruction due to the flexure of the gastric conduit, which was repeatedly treated with endoscopic balloon dilation. Endoscopic balloon dilation was completely ineffective, however, because the obstruction was not due to a small lumen diameter, but rather to severe flexure. We hypothesized that the power of contraction provided by ulcer scar formation after mucosal resection could straighten the flexure, and thus removed a piece of the mucosa 8 cm in diameter on the oral side of the flexure by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) 4 months after the esophagectomy. Endoscopic examination on post-ESD Day 10 revealed that the gastric conduit flexure was straightened due to ulcer scarring, and obstruction at the flexure opened over time. Meals were restarted and the patient could eat without vomiting. He was discharged from the hospital 5 weeks after ESD. This is the first case report of obstruction due to flexure of the gastric conduit after esophagectomy that was successfully treated with mucosectomy using ESD. Mucosectomy using ESD may be an effective treatment option for obstruction due to flexure of the gastric conduit after esophagectomy.

Gastric conduit obstruction due to gastroduodenal compression: a new complication post-Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy

INTRODUCTION

Oesophagectomy for oesophageal carcinoma carries a high risk of significant morbidity and mortality. Delayed gastric emptying is a relatively common complication following this procedure. A variety of medical, surgical and endoscopic strategies have been described to manage it. The vast majority of cases are related to post-operative pyloric dysfunction and are amenable to conventional management strategies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We present a new case of a patient with a duodenal hiatus hernia resulting in extrinsic gastroduodenal compression by the massively distended gastric conduit as a cause of gastric outlet obstruction following laparoscopic-assisted Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy 2 years previously.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Surgical repair of the hiatus hernia restored the post-oesophagectomy anatomy and resolved this patient's symptoms where conventional management of post-oesophagectomy gastric outlet obstruction had failed on multiple occasions. Most cases of delayed gastric emptying post-oesophagectomy occur as a result of pyloric dysfunction and can be managed using a combination of prokinetics, surgical intervention or more commonly, endoscopic dilatation. Other potential causes and therefore investigative and management strategies should be considered in patients who repeatedly fail conventional management. We offer an alternative diagnosis that may be considered in these patients and present a novel approach to their investigation and management.

Air Bubble Sign: A New Screening Method for Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Contrast esophagography often is performed to screen for anastomotic leakage (AL) after esophagectomy. However, its sensitivity remains low. Adverse events also have been reported. This report describes a new screening method to detect AL on computed tomography (CT) after esophagectomy.

METHODS

From January 2012 to December 2015, 185 patients with esophageal cancer underwent surgical resection at the authors' institution. The study comparatively reviewed patient characteristics, surgical outcomes, and findings from postoperative CT images and contrast esophagrams of 142 patients who underwent esophagectomy followed by primary gastric conduit reconstruction through a posterior mediastinum route.

RESULTS

In this study, 24 patients (15.5%) had AL (leakage-positive group), and 120 patients (84.5%) did not (leakage-negative group). Both groups had comparable backgrounds. The number of air bubbles around the anastomotic site and the mediastinal space on postoperative CT images were significantly greater in the leakage-positive group than in the leakage-negative group. The cutoff value for the number of air bubbles required for a positive diagnosis of AL ("air bubble sign") was calculated to be 3 by receiver operating characteristic curve. Compared with contrast esophagography, the air bubble sign on CT demonstrated a significantly higher sensitivity (86.4 vs. 50.0%) and an equivalent specificity (95.8 vs. 100.0%). Contrast esophagography altered the postoperative management of only five patients (3.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

A positive air bubble sign on CT is an objective and noninvasive screening method for AL after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer and may replace contrast esophagography as a screening test for AL.

Gastric Outlet Obstruction After Esophagectomy: Retrospective Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Postoperative Endoscopic Pyloric Dilatation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Delayed gastric emptying after esophagectomy with gastric replacement can pose a significant postoperative problem, often leading to aspiration and pneumonia. The present study analyzes retrospectively the effectiveness of endoscopic pyloric dilatation for post-surgical gastric outlet obstruction.

METHODS

Between March 2006 and March 2010, 403 patients underwent a transthoracic en-bloc esophagectomy and reconstruction with a gastric tube and intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy. In patients with postoperative symptoms of an outlet dysfunction and the confirmation by endoscopy, pyloric dilatations were performed without preference with either 20- or 30-mm balloons.

RESULTS

A total of 89 balloon dilatations of the pylorus after esophagectomy were performed in 60 (15.6 %) patients. In 21 (35 %) patients, a second dilatation of the pylorus was performed. 55 (61.8 %) dilatations were performed with a 30-mm balloon and 34 (38.2 %) with a 20-mm balloon. The total redilatation rate for the 30-mm balloon was 20 % (n = 11) and 52.9 % (n = 18) for the 20-mm balloon (p < 0.001). All dilatations were performed without any complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Pylorus spasm contributes to delayed gastric emptying leading to postoperative complications after esophagectomy. Endoscopic pyloric dilatation after esophagectomy is a safe procedure for treatment of gastric outlet obstruction. The use of a 30-mm balloon has the same safety profile but a 2.5 lower redilatation rate compared to the 20-mm balloon. Thus, the use of 20-mm balloons has been abandoned in our clinic.

Do intraoperative pyloric interventions predict the need for postoperative endoscopic interventions after minimally invasive esophagectomy?

Intraoperative pyloric procedures are often performed during esophagectomies to reduce the rates of gastric conduit dysfunction. They include pyloroplasty (PP), pyloromyotomy (PM), and pylorus botulinum toxin type-A injections (BI). Despite these procedures, patients frequently warrant further endoscopic interventions. The aim of this study is to compare intraoperative pyloric procedures and the rates of postoperative endoscopic interventions following minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). We identified patients who underwent MIE for esophageal carcinoma and grouped them as 'None' (no intervention), 'PP', 'PM', or 'BI' based on intraoperative pyloric procedure type. The rates of endoscopic interventions for the first six postoperative months were compared. To adjust for variability due to MIE type, the rates of >1 interventions were compared using a zero-inflated Poisson regression analysis. Significance was established at P < 0.05. There were 146 patients who underwent an MIE for esophageal cancer from 2008 to 2015; 77.4% were three-hole MIE, and 22.6% were Ivor- Lewis MIE. BI was most frequent in Ivor-Lewis patients (63.5%), while PP was most frequent (46.9%) in three-hole patients. Postoperative endoscopic interventions occurred in 38 patients (26.0%). The BI group had the highest percentage of patients requiring a postoperative intervention (n = 13, 31.7%). After adjusting for higher rates of interventions in three-hole MIE patients, the BI and None groups had the lowest rates of >1 postoperative interventions. Our data did not show superiority of any pyloric intervention in preventing endoscopic interventions. The patients who received BI to the pylorus demonstrated a trend toward a greater likelihood of having a postoperative intervention. However when adjusted for type of MIE, the BI and None groups had lower rates of subsequent multiple interventions. Further research is needed to determine if the choice of intraoperative pyloric procedure type significantly affects quality of life, morbidity, and overall prognosis in these patients.

Risk factors for delayed gastric emptying in patients undergoing esophagectomy without pyloric drainage

BACKGROUND

The incidence of delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after esophagectomy is 10%-50%, which can interfere with postoperative recovery in the short-term and result in poor quality of life in the long term. Pyloric drainage is routinely performed to prevent DGE, but its role is highly controversial. The aim of this study was to report the rate of DGE after esophagectomy without pyloric drainage and to investigate its risk factors and the potential effect on recovery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2010 and January 2015, we analyzed 285 consecutive patients who received an esophagectomy without pyloric drainage. Possible correlations between the incidence of DGE and its potential risk factors were examined in univariate and multivariate analyses, respectively. The outcomes of DGE were reviewed with a follow-up of 3 mo.

RESULTS

The overall rate of DGE after esophagectomy was 18.2% (52/285). Among perioperative factors, gastric size (gastric tube versus the whole stomach) was the only significant factor affecting the incidence of DGE in the univariate analysis. The patients who received a whole stomach as an esophageal substitute were more likely to develop DGE than were patients with a gastric tube (13.2% versus 22.4%; P = 0.05). No independent risk factor for DGE was found in the multivariate analysis. The incidence of major postoperative complications, including anastomotic leak, respiratory complications, and cardiac complications, was also not significantly different between both groups, with or without DGE. Within 3 mo of follow-up, most patients could effectively manage their DGE through medication (39/52) or endoscopic pyloric dilation (12/52), with only one patient requiring surgical intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, the overall incidence of DGE is about 20% for patients undergoing esophagectomy without pyloric drainage. Compared with prior findings, this does not result in a significantly increased incidence of DGE. In patients with symptoms of DGE after esophagectomy, prokinetic agents and endoscopic balloon dilation of the pylorus can be effective, as indicated by the high success rate and lack of significant complications.

Update on endoscopic management of gastric outlet obstruction in children

Endoscopic balloon dilatation (EBD) and surgical intervention are two most common and effective treatments for gastric outlet obstruction. Correction of gastric outlet obstruction without the need for surgery is an issue that has been tried to be resolved in these decades; this management has developed with EBD, advanced treatments like local steroid injection, electrocauterization, and stent have been added recently. The most common causes of pediatric gastric outlet obstruction are idiopathic hypertrophic pyloric stenosis, peptic ulcer disease followed by the ingestion of caustic substances, stenosis secondary to surgical anastomosis; antral web, duplication cyst, ectopic pancreas, and other rare conditions. A complete clinical, radiological and endoscopic evaluation of the patient is required to make the diagnosis, with complimentary histopathologic studies. EBD are used in exceptional cases, some with advantages over surgical intervention depending on each patient in particular and on the characteristics and etiology of the gastric outlet obstruction. Local steroid injection and electrocauterization can augment the effect of EBD. The future of endoscopic treatment seems to be aimed at the use of endoscopic electrocauterization and balloon dilatations.

Esophagectomy and Gastric Pull-through Procedures: Surgical Techniques, Imaging Features, and Potential Complications

Esophagectomy takes the center stage in the curative treatment of local and local-regional esophageal cancer. It is a complex procedure with a high postoperative complication rate. When interpreting imaging studies, radiologists must understand the surgical techniques used and their potential complications. The most common surgical techniques are transthoracic esophagectomies, such as the Ivor Lewis and McKeown techniques, and transhiatal esophagectomy. Variations of these techniques include different choices of conduit (ie, stomach, colon, or jejunum) to serve in lieu of the resected esophagus. Postoperative imaging and accurate interpretation is vital in the aftercare of these patients. Chest radiographs, esophagrams, and computed tomographic images play an essential role in early identification of complications. Pulmonary complications and anastomotic leaks are the leading causes of postoperative morbidity and mortality secondary to esophagectomy. Other complications include technical and functional problems and delayed complications such as anastomotic strictures and disease recurrence. An esophagographic technique is described that is performed by using hand injection of contrast material into an indwelling nasogastric tube. Familiarity with the various types of esophagectomy and an understanding of possible complications are of utmost importance for radiologists and allow them to be key participants in the treatment of patients undergoing these complicated procedures.

[Management of delayed complications after esophagectomy]

Esophagectomy and subsequent reconstruction represent major physiological insults to the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract, which as a consequence can lead to malnutrition, dysphagia and reflux. From a technical perspective, operative reconstruction involving gastric pull-up with a 2-3 cm wide tube and an anastomosis cranial to the azygos vein may minimize the symptoms. Overall, the problems tend to improve approximately 6 months after the operation. Newly occurring delayed physical functional impairments with previously known underlying malignant disease may be indicative of cancer relapse. Interventional techniques, such as stent placement or brachytherapy may be better suited for treatment of recurrent disease.

Comparison of pyloromyotomy, pyloric buginage, and intact pylorus on gastric drainage in gastric pull-up surgery after esophagectomy

Background:

There are controversies regarding the usefulness of the pyloric drainage methods after esophagectomy as well as differences among various pyloric drainage techniques. Therefore, we compared the outcome of pyloromyotomy, pylorus buginage, and no intervention methods on gastric emptying among patients undergone esophagectomy.

Materials and Methods:

In this randomized clinical trial, patients with diagnosed esophageal cancer or any other benign lesions candidate for esophagectomy were selected. They randomized in three groups with three different approaches for gastric pull-up esophageal surgery including esophagectomy with pyloromyotomy, esophagectomy without intervention, and esophagectomy with pylorus buginage. The outcomes of procedures regarding gastric emptying time and delayed gastric emptying were compared.

Results:

Thirty patients were allocated in three groups. Gastric emptying time was not significantly different in the three groups (P > 0.05). Frequency of delayed gastric emptying, complications and barium leakage were not different in three studied groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusion:

Gastric emptying time and delayed gastric emptying were not different between common pyloric drainage methods after esophagectomy and esophagectomy without drainage.

Per-Oral Pyloromyotomy (POP): An Emerging Application of Submucosal Tunneling for the Treatment of Refractory Gastroparesis

A growing body of literature supports the use of laparoscopic pyloroplasty as a minimally invasive treatment of refractory gastroparesis that has failed conservative measures and for benign gastric outlet obstruction. Endoscopic pyloric dilation, stent placement, and Botox have been described for similar indications, but often with transient or mixed results. Per-oral pyloromyotomy has recently been proposed as an endoscopic alternative to surgical pyloroplasty or pylormyotomy because it is less invasive by its nature and potentially more durable than current endoscopic treatments.

[Management of perioperative complications following tumor resection in the upper gastrointestinal tract]

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection of tumors of the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract represent complex procedures and are still associated with a relevant morbidity and mortality. A targeted preoperative risk analysis and patient selection with consideration of the nutritional status and comorbidities are important in order to reduce the perioperative complication rate.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Anastomotic leaks still remain the most feared surgical complication and in addition to early recognition, immediate initiation of an appropriate therapy are essential. Conservative treatment can be considered for small and adequately drained fistulas as well as in cervical leakages. Indications for surgical reintervention are leaks that occur in the early postoperative course, fulminant defects with diffuse mediastinitis and conduit necrosis. The majority of anastomotic leaks can be successfully managed with minimally invasive endoscopic techniques, e.g. stent placement and endoluminal vacuum therapy. Delayed gastric emptying is frequently observed following esophageal resection and usually shows a satisfactory response to medicinal treatment and endoscopic interventions. The benefits of pyloroplasty in the primary intervention is still a matter of debate. Chylothorax is a rare but serious complication which should initially be managed with conservative measures.

CONCLUSIONS

For the successful management of postoperative complications following surgical resection of tumors of the upper GI tract both an interdisciplinary approach and the availability of an appropriate infrastructure with defined algorithms are of paramount importance. Therefore, a concentration of these procedures in specialized centers would be highly desirable.

Surgical techniques to prevent delayed gastric emptying after esophagectomy with gastric interposition: a systematic review

Delayed gastric emptying is observed in 10% to 50% of patients after esophagectomy with gastric interposition. The effects of gastric interposition diameter, pyloric drainage, reconstructive route, and anastomotic site on postoperative gastric emptying were systematically reviewed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Most studies showed superior passage of the gastric tube compared with the whole stomach. Pyloric drainage is not significantly associated with the risk of developing delayed gastric emptying after esophagectomy. For reconstructive route and anastomotic site, available evidence on delayed gastric emptying is limited. Prospectively randomized studies with standardized outcome measurements are recommended.

Outcomes in the management of esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer rates have continued to rise in the Western World. Esophageal cancer will be responsible for an estimated 15,450 deaths in the United States in 2014 alone. Esophageal resection with or without preoperative therapy remains the mainstay of treatment. Advances in surgical technique and perioperative care have improved short-term outcomes considerably by decreasing operative mortality. Despite these advances though, esophagectomy remains a procedure associated with considerable morbidity from a wide range of complications. Prompt recognition and treatment of complications can lower overall morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately, long-term outcomes remain poor as the vast majority of patients present with loco-regionally advanced or metastatic disease. Surgery by itself provides poor loco-regional control and fails to address micrometastatic disease. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation provides a modest survival advantage compared to surgical resection alone. Future gains in understanding the molecular biology of esophageal cancer will hopefully lead to improved therapeutics and resultant outcomes.

Should we continue to drain the pylorus in patients undergoing an esophagectomy?

A systematic review of the literature was performed to assess the necessity of a pyloric drainage procedure during an esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction. Earlier data recommend performing a pyloric drainage procedure for all esophagectomies; however, recent studies have questioned this. A thorough literature search (January 2001-November 2011) was performed using the terms esophagectomy, pyloroplasty, pyloromyotomy, botulinum toxin, and pyloric drainage. Only studies that compared patient outcome after undergoing an esophagectomy with a pyloric drainage procedure with those undergoing an esophagectomy without a pyloric drainage procedure were selected. Only four studies, comprising 668 patients in total, were identified that compared patient outcome after undergoing an esophagectomy with or without a pyloric drainage procedure, and two additional meta-analyses were identified and selected for discussion. All studies were retrospective, and because of the heterogeneity of studies, patient demographics, reporting, and statistical analysis of patient outcome, pooling of data and meta-analysis could not be performed. Careful analysis demonstrated that pyloric drainage procedure was associated with a non-significant trend for delayed gastric emptying and biliary reflux, while not affecting the incidence of dumping. No correlation was determined between a pyloric drainage procedure and anastomotic leaks, postoperative pulmonary complications, length of hospital stay, and overall perioperative morbidity. While there are risks associated with a pyloric drainage procedure and data exist supporting its omission during an esophagectomy, no good conclusion can be drawn from the current literature. Larger multi-institutional, prospective studies are required to definitively answer this question.

Intrapyloric botulinum injection increases postoperative esophagectomy complications

BACKGROUND

Intrapyloric botulinum toxin injection has emerged as a possible alternative to standard pyloric drainage procedures. Possible advantages include decreased operative time and less postoperative dumping and bile reflux symptoms. However, data are lacking to show its effectiveness versus standard drainage procedures. The purpose of this review is to compare the results in a prospective cohort of patients who received pyloric botulinum injection versus patients who received pyloromyotomy or pyloroplasty with esophagectomy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of a prospective database of all patients who underwent an open esophageal resection at a single institution from 2005 through 2010. Three hundred twenty-two patients were divided into 3 groups for analysis: botulinum injection (n = 78), pyloromyotomy (n = 45), and pyloroplasty (n = 199). We compared these groups with respect to duration of the procedure, presence of delayed gastric emptying on postoperative swallow studies, requirement of anastomotic dilation, requirement of pyloric dilation, use of postoperative promotility agents, and patient experience of postoperative symptoms of reflux or dumping, or both.

RESULTS

Patients receiving botulinum injections experienced similar delayed gastric emptying on postoperative radiologic evaluation as did patients undergoing pyloromyotomy and pyloroplasty (16% versus 5% and 13%, respectively; p = 0.14). Mean operative time was significantly shorter for the patients receiving botulinum as expected (239 minutes versus 312 minutes and 373 minutes, respectively; p < 0.001). However, more patients receiving botulinum and pyloric dilation (22% versus 4% and 2%, respectively; p < 0.001) experienced postoperative reflux symptoms (32% versus 12% and 13%, respectively; p = 0.001) and used postoperative promotility agents (22% versus 5% and 15%, respectively; p = 0.04). There was no statistical difference between the groups regarding postoperative dumping.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of intrapyloric botulinum injection significantly decreased operative time. However, the patients receiving botulinum experienced more postoperative reflux symptoms, had increased use of promotility agents as well as a requirement for postoperative endoscopic interventions, and postoperative dumping was not reduced by the reversible procedure. Intrapyloric botulinum injection should not be used as an alternative to standard drainage procedures. Pyloromyotomy appears to be the drainage procedure of choice to accompany an esophagectomy.

Comparison of pyloric intervention strategies at the time of esophagectomy: is more better?

BACKGROUND

Controversy remains regarding the role of pyloric drainage procedures after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction. We aimed to compare the effect of pyloric drainage strategies upon subsequent risk of complications suggestive of conduit distention, including aspiration and anastomotic leak.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted reviewing patients undergoing esophagectomy between January 2007 and April 2012. Prospectively collected data included baseline comorbidities, operative details, hospital course, and complications. Statistical comparisons were performed using analysis of variance for continuous variables and χ(2) testing for categorical variables.

RESULTS

There were 361 esophagectomies performed during the study period; 68 were excluded from analysis (for prior esophagogastric surgery or benign disease or both). Among 293 esophagectomies included, emptying procedures were performed as follows: 44 (15%), no drainage procedure; 197 (67%), pyloromyotomy/pyloroplasty; 8 (3%), dilation alone; 44 (15%), dilation plus onabotulinumtoxinA. Aspiration occurred more frequently when no pyloric intervention was performed (5 of 44 [11.4%] versus 6 of 249 [2.4%], p = 0.030). The incidences of anastomotic leak (18 [6.1%]) and gastric outlet obstruction (5 [1.7%]) were statistically similar among groups. Subgroup analysis demonstrated persistence of these findings when limiting the comparison to transthoracic esophagectomies. Major complications directly related to pyloroplasty/pyloromyotomy occurred in 2 patients (0.6%), including 1 death (0.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that omission of pyloric intervention at the index operation results in more frequent aspiration events. The combination of dilation plus onabotulinumtoxinA provided for a similar complication profile compared with surgical drainage. Future prospective comparisons are needed to evaluate these short-term effects of pyloric intervention as well as long-term sequelae such as dumping syndrome and bile reflux.

Delayed gastric emptying after esophagectomy for malignancy

BACKGROUND

Controversy still exists about the need for pyloric drainage procedures after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction. Although pyloric drainage may prevent postoperative delayed gastric emptying (DGE), it may also promote dumping syndrome and bile reflux. The aims of this study were to audit the incidence and management of DGE in patients without routine pyloric drainage after esophagectomy in a university medical center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From July 2006 to June 2012, data from 356 consecutive patients who underwent esophagectomy with a gastric conduit without pyloric drainage for esophageal or gastric cardia carcinoma were reviewed. Major observation parameters were the incidence, management, and outcomes of DGE.

RESULTS

Overall incidence of DGE was 15.7% (56 of 356). Early DGE developed in 26 patients, and late DGE developed in 30 patients. There were no differences in demographic and intraoperative data between the two groups with or without DGE. More DGE was documented in patients with an intra-right thoracic gastric conduit (P=.031). A higher incidence of postoperative pneumonia was observed in patients exhibiting early DGE, but without significance (P=.254). There were also no significant impacts on respiratory failure (P=.848) and anastomotic leakage (P=.257). There was an increased postoperative hospital stay with DGE, but without significance (P=.089). Endoscopic balloon dilatation of the pylorus was used to manage 33.9% of patients with DGE, yielding a 78.9% (15 of 19) success rate without complications. In 3 patients endoscopy showed the pylorus was open, and their symptoms improved over time. One patient with tumor-related DGE was treated by pyloric stent. The remaining patients were adequately treated with conservative management.

CONCLUSIONS

Omitting the operative drainage procedure does not lead to an increased frequency of DGE after esophagectomy with a gastric conduit. Many patients responded to conservative management, and endoscopic balloon pyloric dilatation can be effective in managing the DGE postoperatively.

Routine contrast esophagram has minimal impact on the postoperative management of patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Routine contrast esophagram is frequently performed after esophagectomy in order to detect occult anastomotic leak (AL). This modality has a low sensitivity, and its routine use has been called into question. Accordingly, we sought to demonstrate the clinical impact of routine contrast esophagography in the management of patients undergoing esophagectomy for malignant disease.

METHODS

All patients undergoing esophagectomy from 2005 to 2011 for malignancy at a North American University hospital were identified from a prospectively collected database. Barium esophagram (BE) was performed within the first week postoperatively. Patients were dichotomized according to whether they had an AL, and the sensitivity and specificity of BE was determined. The clinical impact of the BE result, defined as cessation of enteral feeding, additional interventions, or delay in discharge, was determined.

RESULTS

Overall, 221 patients underwent esophagectomy. Thirty (13.6 %) developed an AL, of which 10 (30 %) had a positive BE, 12 (40 %) had a negative BE, and 8 (26.7 %) had no BE and were diagnosed clinically (1/8), by computed tomography (CT) (3/8), endoscopically (3/8), or at reoperation (1/7). AL in patients with a negative BE was confirmed clinically (4/12), by CT (6/12), endoscopically (1/12), or at reoperation (1/12). The sensitivity and specificity of BE was 45.5 and 97.8 %, respectively. BE altered postoperative management in 8/221 (3.6 %) patients, with 5/221 (2.3 %) undergoing therapeutic intervention. Conversely, 3/221 (1.4 %) patients demonstrated clinically insignificant AL, delaying discharge and feeding without intervention.

CONCLUSION

Contrast esophagram is not an effective screening modality for AL when employed routinely following esophagectomy.

The impact of pyloric drainage on clinical outcome following esophagectomy: a systematic review

Delayed emptying of the gastric conduit following esophagectomy can be associated with an increased incidence of complications including aspiration pneumonia and anastomotic leak. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the current modalities of pyloric drainage following esophagectomy and their impact on anastomotic integrity and postoperative morbidity. Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane library, trial registries, and conference proceedings were searched. Five pyloric management strategies following esophagectomy were evaluated: no intervention, botulinum toxin (botox) injection, finger fracture, pyloroplasty, and pyloromyotomy. Outcomes evaluated were hospital mortality, anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, delayed gastric emptying, and the late complication of bile reflux. Twenty-five publications comprising 3172 patients were analyzed. Pooled analysis of six comparative studies published after 2000 revealed pyloric drainage to be associated with a nonsignificant trend toward a reduced incidence of anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, and delayed gastric emptying. Overall, the current level of evidence regarding the merits of individual pyloric drainage strategies remains very poor. There is significant heterogeneity in the definitions of clinical outcomes, in particular delayed gastric emptying, which has prevented meaningful assessment and formulation of consensus regarding the management of the pylorus during esophagectomy. Pyloric drainage procedures showed a non-significant trend toward fewer anastomotic leaks, pulmonary complications, and reduced gastric stasis when employed following esophagectomy. However, the ideal technique remains unproven suggesting that further collaborative investigations are needed to determine the intervention that will maximize the potential benefits, if any, of pyloric intervention.

Botulinum toxin for prevention of delayed gastric emptying after esophagectomy

Background

Esophageal cancer is among the most common gastrointestinal cancers for which the main treatment is surgery. This study was undertaken to analyze the results of Botox injection in preventing gastric stasis in these patients.

Patients and methods

60 patients with esophageal cancer in the middle and lower third parts were included in our study between 2010 and 2011, and were randomly divided into two groups. In group A, 30 patients underwent pyloroplasty, and in group B, injection of botulinum toxin into the pyloric sphincter muscle was used in 30 patients.

Results

The mean age of these patients was 61 ± 10.7 years and the male/female ratio was 33:27. Isotope scans 3 weeks after surgery showed that 5 patients in group A and 3 in group B had delayed gastric emptying; there was no significant difference between the 2 groups, and the success rate of Botox injection was 90%.

Conclusion

Considering the fact that there was no significant difference between pyloroplasty and Botox injection on gastric emptying after surgery, and given the need to use less-aggressive techniques and facilitate greater use of endoscopic methods, botulinum toxin injection may be used instead of pyloroplasty as a simple, effective, and complication-free method to prevent delayed gastric emptying.

Complications of esophagectomy

Esophagectomy remains the gold standard curative therapy for the treatment of esophageal cancer. Despite 125 years of evolution, esophagectomy remains a demanding procedure associated with a 5% to 10% mortality and a 50% morbidity rate. Knowledge of the multitude of techniques possible for performing this complex procedure, as well as the host of associated complications, is vital for the practitioner aspiring to treat this challenging disease.

Endoscopic pyloric balloon dilatation obviates the need for pyloroplasty at esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Because the rate of acquired pyloric stenosis (APS) from truncal vagotomy is 15%, many surgeons perform pyloroplasty or pyloromyotomy at the time of esophagectomy. Endoscopic pyloric balloon dilatation (EPBD) is another method to manage APS. This study evaluated a cohort treated with preoperative EPBD.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of all patients treated with preoperative EPBD and esophagectomy for cancer from 2002 to 2009 at Brigham and Women's Hospital, a tertiary care center. Outcome measures included need for subsequent surgery for gastric outlet obstruction, rate of pyloric stenosis noted on postoperative endoscopy, and complications.

RESULTS

Upon review of the series, 25 patients (80% male; median age, 63 [range 47-81] years) had outpatient preoperative EPBD and esophagectomies 1-2 weeks later and were included in the study. None had pyloroplasties or pyloromyotomies at the time of esophagectomy. Selected patients had postoperative endoscopy. Of the 25 patients, 20 had transhiatal esophagectomies, 3 had thoracoabdominal esophagectomies, and 2 had VATS 3-hole esophagectomies. Median follow-up time was 22 (range, 1-84) months. There were no complications from EPBD. There were no postoperative deaths. No patient needed a second operation for gastric outlet obstruction. All patients had postoperative barium swallows (BaS) or endoscopy or both. Only one patient (4%) required one postoperative EPBD to dilate a 16-mm pylorus. Three others had delayed gastric emptying on BaS with endoscopy showing each pylorus was wide open. Their symptoms improved with time.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort, preoperative EPBD in all patients combined with postoperative EPBD in one patient obviated the need for pyloroplasty. This approach merits further study in a larger cohort, particularly to determine whether preoperative EPBD is necessary or if only selected postoperative EPBD is sufficient.

Functional disorders and quality of life after esophagectomy and gastric tube reconstruction for cancer

Functional disorders such as delayed gastric emptying, dumping syndrome or duodeno-gastro-esophageal reflux occur in half of the patients who undergo esophagectomy and gastric tube reconstruction for cancer. The potential role for pyloroplasty in the prevention of functional disorders is still debated. Antireflux fundoplication during esophagectomy can apparently reduce the reflux but at the cost of increasing the complexity of the operation; it is not widely used. The treatment of functional disorders arising after esophagectomy and gastroplasty for cancer is based mainly on dietary measures. Proton pump inhibitors have well documented efficiency and should be given routinely to prevent reflux complications. Erythromycin may prevent delayed gastric emptying, but it should be used with caution in patients with cardiovascular disorders. In the event of anastomotic stricture, endoscopic dilatation is usually efficient. Problems related to gastrointestinal functional disorders after esophageal resection and gastric tube reconstruction do not significantly impair long-term quality of life, which is mainly influenced by tumor recurrence.

Usefulness of Pyloromyotomy With Transhiatal Esophagectomy in Improving Gastric Emptying

INTRODUCTION

Pyloromyotomy is a pyloric drainage procedure routinely done during transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) to prevent delayed gastric emptying (GE) resulting from truncal vagotomy. However, controversy still surrounds the need for pyloric drainage following esophageal substitution with gastric conduit after esophagectomy. The aim of this study was to determine the usefulness of pyloromyotomy in improving the postoperative gastric emptying time.

METHODS

Forty patients with esophageal cancer underwent THE. 20 patients underwent THE without pyloromyotomy (group A), while the other 20 patients (group B) underwent THE with pyloromyotomy. Using Technetium-99 m, gastric scintigraphy-using gamma camera, was done for all the patients 6 months post-surgery to measure the gastric half emptying time (T50).

RESULTS

For the liquid phase, the mean (T50) in the patients without pyloromytomy (group A) was 74.5 ± 56.71 minutes ± SD versus 62.85 ± 59.35 minutes ± SD in the patients with pyloromytomy (group B) which is not significant (P = 0.529). For the solid phase, the mean (T50) in patients of group A was 139.40 ± 94.156 minutes ± SD versus 141.15 ± 48.423 minutes ± SD in group B (P value 0.941) which is also not significant.

CONCLUSION

Six months after THE, pyloromyotomy done with THE showed no significant value on affecting the mean gastric emptying time compared to those underwent THE without pyloromyotomy.

Prevention of early delayed gastric emptying after high-level esophagogastrostomy by "pyloric digital fracture"

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of pyloric digital fracture for the prevention of early delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after high-level esophagogastrostomy.

METHODS

From January 2004 to March 2009, we sequentially enrolled 78 patients after esophagogastrostomy: 48 patients with pyloric digital fracture (DF group) and 30 patients without any drainage procedure (non-DF group). Intraoperative manometric study was performed in 48 patients of the DF group. Postoperative evaluation was performed, including symptomatic questionnaire, radiographic study, and gastric scintigraphy.

RESULTS

Intraoperative manometric study revealed that basal pyloric pressure and peak pressure of pylorus in phase III of the migrating motor complex increased significantly after gastric conduit was made and anastomosed, but decreased appreciably following digital fracture. Compared with the peak pressure of IPPW before digital fracture (88.52 ± 19.88 mmHg), it appreciably decreased following digital fracture (40.45 ± 13.52 mmHg). Occurrences of IPPW (in 10 min) and duration time of each occurrence (s) had similar trends for before and after digital fracture (11.5 ± 4.5 vs. 5.0 ± 3.5 and 7.0 ± 2.0 vs. 3.0 ± 1.0, respectively). Postoperative evaluation demonstrated that early DGE occurred in four patients in the non-DF group (13.3%), and there was no DGE patient in the DF group. There was significant difference regarding gastric scores between the DF group and the non-DF group (10.5 ± 3.4 vs. 16.7 ± 3.8, t = 2.8271, P < 0.05). Gastric scintigraphy revealed that either semi-emptying-time or percent of retention at 4 h of the DF group was significantly lower than that of the non-DF group.

CONCLUSION

Pyloric digital fracture can prevent early DGE after high-level esophagogastrostomy efficaciously and conveniently.

Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy without Pyloroplasty: Analysis of 109 Cases

Pyloroplasty is performed during esophagectomy to avoid delayed gastric emptying. However, studies have shown that gastric function is minimally impaired even without a pyloroplasty when a gastric tube rather than the whole stomach is used for reconstruction. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy without performance of a pyloroplasty. We performed a retrospective review of 145 patients who underwent a minimally invasive esophagectomy. The 30-day mortality was 2.1 per cent with an in-hospital mortality of 3.4 per cent. Of the 140 patients with more than 90 days follow-up, 31 patients had a pyloroplasty and 109 patients did not. One (3.2%) of 31 patients with pyloroplasty versus six (5.5%) of 109 patients without pyloroplasty developed delayed gastric emptying. There was no significant difference in the leak rate between the two groups (9.7% vs 9.6%, respectively). Total operative time was significantly shorter in the group without pyloroplasty (360 vs 222 minutes with a pyloroplasty, P < 0.01). Patients with delayed gastric emptying responded well to endoscopic pyloric dilation or Botox injection. The routine performance of a pyloroplasty during minimally invasive esophagectomy can be safely omitted with a reduction in operative time and minimal adverse effects on postoperative gastric function.

Results after radical surgical treatment for advanced carcinoma of hypopharynx

The aim of the study was to investigate patients with hypopharyngeal cancer. And this study focuses on a case series with hypopharynx cancer and cervical oesophageal cancer invading the hypopharynx. There were 13 cases over a period of 8 years, treated with pharyngo-laryngo-esophagectomy (PLE) and cervical lymph node dissection. In 10 of the patients, reconstruction was done with gastric pull-up (GP). In 3 of the 10 patients gastric reconstruction was added to aid in pyloric drainage (2 pyloromyotomy and 1 pyloroplasty) but the remaining 7 patients did not receive such procedures. The reconstruction of the digestive system after PLE is still a matter of debate. GP method is the most frequently preferred method for reconstruction. We believe that a more important problem than gastric drainage is the reflux of the gastric content and pyloric drainage which will not have a positive effect for solving this clinical situation. But we need bigger series for analyze of this specific condition.