Application of standardized hemodynamic protocols within enhanced recovery after surgery programs to improve outcomes associated with anastomotic leak and conduit necrosis in patients undergoing esophagectomy

Anastomotic Leak After Esophagectomy: Modern Approaches to Prevention and Diagnosis

Anastomotic leak (AL) remains one of the most serious complications following esophagectomy, contributing to significant morbidity, prolonged hospital stays, and increased mortality. Despite advancements in surgical techniques and perioperative care, AL continues to challenge surgeons and negatively impact patient outcomes. Various factors contribute to its development, including patient-specific comorbidities, tumor characteristics, anastomotic technique, conduit perfusion, and perioperative management. Prevention strategies have evolved with the integration of intraoperative techniques such as fluorescence-guided perfusion assessment, omental reinforcement, and meticulous surgical handling of the gastric conduit. Emerging technologies, including endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVT) and multimodal perioperative protocols, have demonstrated potential in reducing leak incidence and improving management. Diagnosing AL remains complex due to its variable presentation, necessitating a combination of clinical evaluation, inflammatory markers, imaging studies, and endoscopic assessments. While routine postoperative imaging has shown limited sensitivity, on-demand CT and endoscopic evaluations play a crucial role in early detection and intervention. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the risk factors, prevention strategies, and diagnostic modalities for AL after esophagectomy, incorporating recent advancements and emerging technologies.

GI and GU fluoroscopy in common post-op oncologic surgeries: what you need to know about this leaky business!

Over the past several years, there has been a trend of decreasing screening or diagnostic fluoroscopic examinations ordered by clinical teams, particularly double contrast gastrointestinal studies. The underlying reason is due to increasing number of endoscopic procedures performed by Gastroenterology and Urology and usage of other imaging modalities, which are either more sensitive and/or offer the ability to obtain tissue for confirmation. Many fluoroscopic studies are now tailored toward patients who have undergone gastrointestinal or genitourinary oncologic surgeries, providing both functional and anatomic information, which are important tools for patient management. Some of these surgeries are very complex and an understanding of the postoperative anatomy and potential pitfalls is important to accurately evaluate for complications. The purpose of this article is to describe techniques and indications for common post-operative fluoroscopic procedures in gastrointestinal and genitourinary oncology while reviewing normal appearances. Complications, with emphasis on postoperative leaks, will be highlighted. Familiarity with the various types of gastrointestinal surgeries and urinary diversion techniques and knowledge of the expected postsurgical appearance is essential for achieving an accurate and prompt diagnosis of complications to allow for adequate treatment and management.

Surgical Technique and Implementation of Total Minimally Invasive (Laparo-Thoracoscopic) Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy for Cancer

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Esophagectomy represents a major oncological operation due to the surgical involvement of both the abdominal and thoracic cavities. The minimally invasive technique has been developed to minimize the operative impact on patients undergoing esophageal resections, often presenting with nutritional deterioration and poor functional reserves.

METHODS

The present article provides an illustrative description of the total minimally invasive (laparo-thoracoscopic) Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for cancer integrated with complementary components of perioperative clinical management. This standardized surgical technique of two-field esophagectomy (i.e., laparoscopy and thoracoscopy) was depicted based on the experience of a tertiary center for esophageal cancer care with more than 1500 cases operated on, and in accordance with the SUPER reporting guidelines.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The accomplishment of the following descriptive and illustrative content allowed the development of remarks on the strengths and possible flaws of this specific procedure, providing a measurable opportunity to absorb technical details of the most widespread surgical resection for esophageal cancer worldwide.

Dynamic volume-outcome association for esophagectomies: Do current volume thresholds still apply?

BACKGROUND

It is unknown if the current minimum case volume recommendation of 20 cases per year per hospital is applicable to contemporary practice.

METHODS

Patients undergoing esophageal resection between 2005 and 2015 were identified in the National Cancer Database. High, medium, and low-volume hospital strata were defined by quartiles. Adjusted odds ratios and adjusted 30-day mortality between low-, medium-, and high-volume hospitals were calculated using logistic regression analyses and trended over time.

RESULTS

Only 1.1% of hospitals had ≥20 annual cases. The unadjusted 30-day mortality for esophagectomy was 3.8% overall. Unadjusted and adjusted 30-day mortality trended down for all three strata between 2005 and 2015, with disproportionate decreases for low-volume and medium-volume versus high-volume hospitals. By 2015, adjusted 30-day mortality was similar in medium- and high-volume hospitals (odds ratio 1.35, 95% confidence interval 0.96-1.91). For hospitals with 20 or more annual cases the adjusted 30-day mortality was 2.7% overall. To achieve this same 30-day mortality the minimum volume threshold had lowered to 7 annual cases by 2015.

CONCLUSION

Only 1.1% of hospitals meet current volume recommendations for esophagectomy. Differential improvements in postoperative mortality at low- and medium- versus high-volume hospitals have led to 7 cases in 2015 achieving the same adjusted 30-day mortality as 20 cases in the overall cohort. Lowering volume thresholds for esophagectomy in contemporary practice would potentially increase the proportion of hospitals able to meet volume standards and increase access to quality care without sacrificing quality.

Evolving Perspectives on Esophagectomy Care: Clinical Update

Recent changes in perioperative care have led to new perspectives and important advances that have helped to improve outcomes among patients treated with esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

A narrative review of anastomotic leak in the Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: expected, accepted, but preventable

Background and Objective

Anastomotic leak (AL) remains a common and highly morbid complication after Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy. Leak is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, strictures and even cancer recurrence. Unfortunately, despite advances in surgical technique and perioperative care, the reported frequency of AL has remained largely unchanged.

Methods

A PubMed search for all English-language articles that discuss Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, AL, risk factors, and outcomes was conducted from 1901 to 2023 prioritizing research from randomized trials that evaluated outcomes from patients undergoing esophagectomy.

Key Content and Findings

This narrative review will discuss the prevailing literature on AL, risk factors and outcomes with a focus on its relationship to the Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (ILE). In particular, we emphasize that the gastric conduit, as commonly created for most esophagectomy procedures, is inherently vulnerable to ischemia. We will show trends in the literature that have contributed to the high rate of postoperative complications, with a focus on the AL. In addition, we propose that the traditional Ivor Lewis procedure itself is a risk factor for AL. We review a surgical alternative that increases blood supply of the conduit, and is associated with reduced leak, no strictures, and improved surgical outcomes.

Conclusions

Multiple factors contribute to AL after esophagectomy; including several current surgical practices. We believe that some of them, especially the commonly accepted approach to the gastric conduit, can be modified to optimize tissue perfusion. With further investigation, we may reduce the incidence of short and long-term anastomotic complications and improve surgical outcomes.

Frequency of blood lactate elevation following esophagectomy and its association to postoperative complications

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is a major surgical intervention and a cornerstone in the treatment of esophageal cancer. There is clinical experience that blood lactate concentration often is elevated in the period following esophagectomy, but the incidence and clinical consequences are sparsely studied.

METHODS

We extracted data from all patients undergoing esophagectomy at Karolinska University Hospital 2016-2018, n = 153. Most were performed with minimally invasive technique, n = 130. Blood lactate values directly after surgery, highest value during the first night, and morning level on postoperative day one were recorded. Primary outcome was hospital length of stay and secondary outcome was a composite of postoperative infection, additional surgery, or intensive care during the hospital stay. Development of anastomotic leak was analyzed separately.

RESULTS

Postoperative hyperlactatemia was common as 93% of patients had peak lactate concentration >1.6 mmol/L and 27% >3.5 mmol/L in the first night following operation. Median hospital length of stay was 14 days. Blood lactate showed a weak correlation to hospital stay and intensive care the morning following surgery, but not at arrival to postoperative ward. There were no statistical differences between those with and without anastomotic leak at any of the time points. Elevated lactate in the first 12-16 h postoperatively was related to surgical factors (open technique, surgery time, and perioperative bleeding) but not to patient related factors (ASA-class, Charlson comorbidity index, sex, age) or cumulative fluid balance.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, elevated blood lactate in the immediate time following esophagectomy showed a weak association to intensive care and length of stay but not anastomotic leak.

Dry or wet? Fluid therapy in upper gastrointestinal surgery patients

A correct perioperative fluid administration represents one of the most important items proposed by the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society. Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) surgery patients undergoing major oncological procedures are often elderly and frail. Should we prefer a wet or a dry patient? Both conditions should probably be avoided in this surgical setting. We present a narrative review on perioperative fluid administration in UGI patients undergoing major surgery, also analyzing the role of Goal Directed therapy.

Esophagectomy-prevention of complications-tips and tricks for the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative stage

Esophagectomy still remains the mainstay of treatment for localized esophageal cancer. Many progresses have been made in the technique of esophagectomy in the last decades but the overall morbidity for this operation remains formidable. Postoperative complication and mortality rate after esophagectomy are significant; anastomotic leak has an incidence of 11,4%. The occurrence of a complication is a significant negative prognostic factor for long term survival and is also linked to longer postoperative stay, a lower quality of life, increased hospital costs. Preventing the occurrence of postoperative morbidity and reducing associated postoperative mortality rate is a major goal for surgeons experienced in resective esophageal surgery. Many details of pre, intra and postoperative care for patients undergoing esophagectomy need to be shared among the professionals taking care of these patients (oncologists, dieticians, physiotherapists, surgeons, nurses, anesthesiologists, gastroenterologists) in order to improve the short and long term clinical results.

Open left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy a viable option in the era of minimally invasive esophagectomy

Minimally invasive surgical technique has become standard at many institutions in esophageal cancer surgery. In some situations, however other surgical approaches are required. Left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy (LTE) facilitates complete resection of esophageal cancer particularly for bulky distal esophageal tumors, but there are concerns that this approach is associated with significant morbidity. Prospectively entered esophagectomy databases from three high-volume centers were reviewed for patients undergoing LTE or MIE 2009-2019. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, operative outcomes, postoperative outcomes, and pathologic surrogates of oncologic efficacy (R0 resection rate, and number of resected lymph nodes) were compared. In total 915 patients were included in the study, LTE was applied in 684 (74.8%) patients, and MIE in 231 (25.2%) patients. LTE patients had more locally advanced tumor stage and received more neoadjuvant treatment. Patients treated with MIE had more comorbidities. The results showed no difference in overall postoperative complications (LTE = 61.7%, MIE = 65.7%, P = 0.289), severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥IIIa (LTE = 25.9%, MIE 26.8%, P = 0.806)), pneumonia (LTE = 29.0%, MIE = 24.7%, P = 0.211), anastomotic leak (LTE = 7.8%, MIE = 11.3%, P = 0.101), or in-hospital mortality (LTE = 2.6%, MIE = 3.5%, P = 0.511). Median number of resected lymph nodes was 24 for LTE and 25 for MIE (P = 0.491). LTE was used for more advanced tumors in patients that were more likely to have received neoadjuvant treatment compared with MIE, however postoperative morbidity, mortality, and oncologic outcomes were equivalent to that of MIE in this cohort. In conclusion open resection with left thoracoabdominal approach is a valid option in selected patients when performed at high-volume esophagectomy centers.

Peri-operative approach to esophagectomy: a narrative review from the anesthesiological standpoint

Objective

This review summarizes the peri-operative anesthesiological approaches to esophagectomy considering the best up-to-date, evidence-based medicine, discussed from the anesthesiologist’s standpoint.

Background

Esophagectomy is the only curative therapy for esophageal cancer. Despite the many advancements made in the surgical treatment of this tumour, esophagectomy still carries a morbidity rate reaching 60%. Patients undergoing esophagectomy should be referred to high volume centres where they can receive a multidisciplinary approach to treatment, associated with better outcomes. The anesthesiologist is the key figure who should guide the peri-operative phase, from diagnosis through to post-surgery rehabilitation. We performed an updated narrative review devoted to the study of anesthesia management for esophagectomy in cancer patients.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Scopus and Google Scholar databases from inception to May 2021. We used the following terms: “esophagectomy”, “esophagectomy AND pre-operative evaluation”, “esophagectomy AND protective lung ventilation”, “esophagectomy AND hemodynamic monitoring” and “esophagectomy AND analgesia”. We considered only articles with abstract written in English and available to the reader. We excluded single case-reports.

Conclusions

Pre-operative anesthesiological evaluation is mandatory in order to stratify and optimize any medical condition. During surgery, protective ventilation and judicious fluid management are the cornerstones of intraoperative “protective anesthesia”. Post-operative care should be provided by an intensive care unit or high-dependency unit depending on the patient’s condition, the type of surgery endured and the availability of local resources. The provision of adequate post-operative analgesia favours early mobilization and rapid recovery. Anesthesiologist has an important role during the peri-operative care for esophagectomy. However, there are still some topics that need to be further studied to improve the outcome of these patients.

Impact of the introduction of an enhanced recovery pathway in esophageal cancer surgery: a cohort study and propensity score matching analysis

Enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) have the potential to improve clinical outcomes. Aim of this study was to determine the impact of ERP on perioperative results as compared with traditional care (TC) after esophagectomy. In this study, two cohorts were compared. Cohort 1 represented 296 patients to whom TC was provided. Cohort 2 consisted of 200 unselected ERP patients. Primary endpoints were postoperative complications. Secondary endpoints were the length of stay and 30-day readmission rates. To confirm the possible impact of ERP, a propensity matched analysis (1:1) was conducted. A significant decrease in complications was found in ERP patients, especially for pneumonia and respiratory failure requiring reintubation (39% in TC and 14% in ERP; P<0.0001 and 17% vs. 12%; P<0.0001, respectively) and postoperative blood transfusion (26.7%-11%; P<0.0001). Furthermore, median length of stay was also significantly shorter: 13 days (interquartile range [IQR] 10-23) in TC compared with 10 days (IQR 8-14) in ERP patients (P<0.0001). The 30-day readmission rate (5.4% in TC and 9% in ERP; P=0.121) and in-hospital mortality rate (4.4% in TC and 2.5% in ERP; P=0.270) were not significantly affected. A propensity score matching confirmed a significant impact on pneumonia (P=0.0001), anastomotic leak (P=0.047), several infectious complications (P=0.01-0.034), blood transfusion (P=0.001), Comprehensive Complications Index (P=0.01), and length of stay (P=0.0001). We conclude that ERP for esophagectomy is associated with significantly fewer postoperative complications and blood transfusions, which results in a significant decrease of length of stay without affecting readmission and mortality rates.

Perioperative fluid management in esophagectomy for cancer and its relation to postoperative respiratory complications

The optimal perioperative fluid management during esophagectomy is still not clear. Liberal regimens have been associated with higher morbidity and respiratory complications. Restrictive regimens might raise concerns for kidney function and increase the need to associate vasopressors. The aim of this study was to investigate retrospectively the perioperative fluid administration during esophagectomy and to correlate this with postoperative respiratory outcome. All patients who underwent esophagectomy between January and December 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Patient characteristics, type of surgery and postoperative course were reviewed. Fluid administration and vasopressor use were calculated intraoperatively and during the postoperative stay at the recovery unit. Fluid overload was defined as a positive fluid balance of more than 125 mL/m2/h during the first 24 hours. Patients were divided in 3 groups: GRP0 (no fluid overload/no vasopressors); GRP1 (no fluid overload/need for vasopressors); GRP2 (fluid overload with/without vasopressors). Postoperative complications were prospectively recorded according to Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group criteria. A total of 103 patients were analyzed: 35 (34%) GRP0, 50 (49%) GRP1 and 18 (17%) GRP2. No significant differences were found for age, treatment (neoadjuvant vs. primary), type of surgery (open/minimally invasive), histology nor comorbidities. There were significant (P ≤ 0.001) differences in fluid balance/m2/h (75 ± 21 mL; 86 ± 22 mL and 144 ± 20 mL) across GRP0, GRP1 and GRP2, respectively. We found differences in respiratory complications (GRP0 (20%) versus GRP1 (42%; P = 0.034) and GRP0 (20%) versus GRP2 (61%; P = 0.002)) and "Comprehensive Complications Index" (GRP0 (20.5) versus GRP1 (34.6; P = 0.015) and GRP0 (20.5) versus GRP2 (35.1; P = 0.009)). Multivariable analysis (binary logistic regression) for "any respiratory complication" was performed. Patients who received fluid overload (GRP2) had a 10.24 times higher risk to develop postoperative respiratory complications. When patients received vasopressors alone (GRP1), the chances of developing these complications were 3.57 times higher compared to GRP0. Among patients undergoing esophagectomy, there is a wide variety in the administration of fluid during the first 24 hours. There was a higher incidence of respiratory complications when patients received higher amounts of fluid or when vasopressors were used. We believe that a personalized and protocolized fluid administration algorithm should be implemented and that individual risk factors should be identified.

Therapeutic Effect and Cost-Benefit Analysis of Three Different Nutritional Schemes for Esophageal Cancer Patients in the Early Post-operative Period

Objective: To retrospectively investigate the comparative efficacy, safety and cost-benefits of three nutritional treatment schemes including short peptide jejunal nutrition (SPJN), whole protein jejunal nutrition (WPJN), and partial parenteral nutrition (PPN) in patients underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in our hospital. This study was carried out in accordance with the conceptual framework of nutritional therapy in fast-track rehabilitation surgery.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 305 patients who were assigned to receive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Eligible patients was naturally divided into SPJN group [n = 98 (32.1%)], WPJN group [n = 95 (31.1%)], and PPN group [n = 112 (36.7%)] according to the type of nutritional scheme which was actually prescribed to patients by the attendingphysician in clinical practice. The differences of the serum total protein (TP), albumin (ALB), pre-albumin (PA), hemoglobin (HGB), white blood cells (WBCs), red blood cells (RBCs) and neutrophils were compared among 3 nutritional schemes groups. We also investigated the relationship of the fluid intake, urine output, gastric juice drainage volume and thoracic drainage volume among 3 nutritional groups at 3 days after surgery. Moreover, the differences of cost-benefit indexes, complications, length of hospitalization and hospital expenditure were also compared.

Results: The serum TP, ALB, and PA in the SPJN group were all higher than those in the WPJN and PPN groups (p < 0.05). The gastric juice volume of gastrointestinal decompression drainage and fluid volume of thoracic drainage in the SPJN group were all less than that in the WPJN group (p < 0.05). The overall hospital stay and post-operative hospital stay in the SPJN group were all shorter than that in WPJN group (p < 0.05). Moreover, the incidence of post-operative complications including anastomotic leakage, infection, and gastrointestinal reaction was remarkably lower in the SPJN group compared to the WPJN group (p < 0.05). Interesting, hospital expenditure in the PPN group was less than that in the SPJN and the WPJN groups (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Patients may obtain benefits in improving protein level after receiving SPJN scheme at the early stage after esophagectomy. Meanwhile, patients may obtain benefits in improving post-operative complications and hospital stay after receiving SPJN or PPN compared to WPJN protocol. However, the difference between SPJN and PPN requires further study because no difference was detected in terms of clinical outcomes including complications and the length of hospitalization although PPN may achieve a possible decrease of medical expenditure.

Anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: definitions, diagnostics, and treatment

Anastomotic leakage is one of the most severe complications after esophagectomy and is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Several projects ranging from small retrospective studies to large collaborations have aimed to identify potential pre- and perioperative risk factors and to improve the diagnostic processes and management. Despite the increase in available literature, many aspects of anastomotic leakage are still debated, without the existence of widely accepted guidelines. The purpose of this review is to provide a cutting edge overview of the recent literature regarding the definition and classification of anastomotic leakage, risk factors, novel diagnostic modalities, and emerging therapeutic options for treatment and prevention of anastomotic leakage following esophagectomy.

Contrast-enhanced paravertebrogram to confirm paravertebral catheter position in elective thoracic surgery: a proof of concept study

Background

Paravertebral pain catheters have been shown to be equally effective as epidural pain catheters for postoperative analgesia after thoracic surgery with the possible additional benefit of less hemodynamic effect. However, a methodology for verifying correct paravertebral catheter placement has not been tested or objectively confirmed in previous studies. The aim of the current study was to describe a technique to confirm the correct position of a paravertebral pain catheter using a contrast-enhanced paravertebrogram.

Methods

A retrospective cohort proof of concept study was performed including 10 consecutive patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery with radiographic contrast-enhanced confirmation of intraoperative paravertebral catheter placement (paravertebrogram).

Results

The results of the paravertebrograms, which were done in the operating room at the end of the procedure, verified correct paravertebral catheter placement in 10 of 10 patients. The radiographs documented dissemination of local anesthetic within the paravertebral space.

Conclusion

This proof of concept study demonstrated that a contrast-enhanced paravertebrogram could be used in conjunction with standard postoperative chest radiography to add valuable information for the assessment of paravertebral catheter placement. This technique has the potential to increase the accuracy and efficiency of postoperative analgesia, and to set a quality standard for future studies of paravertebral pain catheters.

Perfusion speed of indocyanine green in the stomach before tubulization is an objective and useful parameter to evaluate gastric microcirculation during Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) during Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (ILE), owing to gastric conduit (GC) ischemia, is a serious complication. Measurement parameters during intraoperative ICG fluorescence angiography (ICG-FA) are unclear. We aimed to identify objective ICG-FA parameters associated with AL.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients > 18 years with an indication for ILE were enrolled. ICG-FA was performed at the abdominal and thoracic stage, and data, such as time of fluorescence appearance, speed of ICG perfusion, quality of GC perfusion (good, poor, ischemic), blood pressure, baseline patient characteristics, GC dimensions, and other intraoperative parameters were collected. On postoperative day 4 to 6, Gastrografin swallow radiography was performed. AL development was classified based on the Clavien-Dindo and SISG severity classifications. Univariate analysis with a 95% confidence level (p < 0.05) was performed. Factors with p < 0.05 were included in the multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

100 patients were enrolled. During ICG-FA, evaluation of subjective perfusion was a very specific test (94.1%) with good negative predictive value (NPV 71.9%, p 0.034), but not powerful enough to detect patients at risk of leak (sensibility 21.8%, PPV 63.6%). The GC perfusion speed (cm/s) after gastric vascular isolation and before tubulization showed a significant association with AL (p < 0.003). Median arterial blood pressure in the thoracic stage (p < 0.001) or use of inotropic (p < 0.033) was associated with AL development.

CONCLUSION

GC perfusion speed at ICG-FA is an objective parameter that could predict AL risk. Other results emphasize the importance of the microcirculation in the development of AL.

Strategies to prevent anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy and gastric conduit reconstruction

Background

Surgery remains the cornerstone of esophageal cancer treatment but is burdened with high procedure-related morbidity. Anastomotic leakage as the most important surgical complication after esophagectomy is a key indicator for quality in surgical outcome research.

Purpose

The aim of this narrative review is to assess and summarize the current knowledge on prevention of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy and to provide orientation for the reader in this challenging field of surgery.

Conclusions

There are various strategies to reduce postoperative morbidity and to prevent anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy, including adequate patient selection and preparation, and many technical-surgical and anesthesiological details. The scientific evidence regarding those strategies is highly heterogeneous, ranging from expert’s recommendations to randomized controlled trials. This review is intended to serve as an empirical guideline to improve the clinical management of patients undergoing esophagectomy with a special focus on anastomotic leakage prevention.