Department of Surgery and Radboud Institute of Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
World J Surg. 2021 Nov;45(11):3341-3349. doi: 10.1007/s00268-021-06250-w. Epub 2021 Aug 9.
Anastomotic leakage has a great impact on clinical outcomes after esophagectomy. It has never been studied whether anastomotic leakage is of equal severity between different types of esophagectomy (i.e., transhiatal, McKeown and Ivor Lewis) in terms of postoperative mortality and morbidity.
All esophageal cancer patients with anastomotic leakage after transhiatal, McKeown or Ivor Lewis esophagectomy between 2011 and 2019 were selected from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) registry. The primary outcome was 30-day/in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, re-operation and ICU readmission rate.
Data from 1030 patients with anastomotic leakage after transhiatal (n=287), McKeown (n=397) and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (n=346) were evaluated. The 30-day/in-hospital mortality rate was 4.5% in patients with leakage after transhiatal esophagectomy, 8.1% after McKeown and 8.1% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P=0.139). After correction for confounders, leakage after transhiatal resection was associated with lower mortality (OR 0.152-0.699, P=0.004), but mortality after McKeown and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy was similar. Re-operation rate was 24.0% after transhiatal, 40.6% after McKeown and 41.3% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P<0.001). ICU readmission rate was 24.0% after transhiatal, 37.8% after McKeown and 43.4% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P<0.001).
This study in patients with anastomotic leakage confirms a strong association between severity of clinical consequences and different types of esophagectomy. It supports the hypothesis that cervical leakage is generally less severe than intrathoracic leakage. The clinical impact of anastomotic leakage should be taken into account, in addition to its incidence, when different types of esophagectomy are compared by clinicians or researchers.
吻合口漏对食管切除术后的临床结局有重大影响。目前尚不清楚吻合口漏在经胸、McKeown 和 Ivor Lewis 三种不同类型食管切除术后的严重程度是否相同(即术后死亡率和发病率)。
从荷兰上消化道癌症审计(DUCA)登记处选择 2011 年至 2019 年间经胸、McKeown 或 Ivor Lewis 食管切除术后发生吻合口漏的所有食管癌患者。主要结局为 30 天/住院死亡率。次要结局包括术后并发症、再次手术和 ICU 再入院率。
共评估了 1030 例经胸(n=287)、McKeown(n=397)和 Ivor Lewis 食管切除术后吻合口漏患者的数据。经胸食管切除术后吻合口漏患者的 30 天/住院死亡率为 4.5%,McKeown 组为 8.1%,Ivor Lewis 组为 8.1%(P=0.139)。在对混杂因素进行校正后,经胸切除术吻合口漏与较低的死亡率相关(OR 0.152-0.699,P=0.004),但 McKeown 和 Ivor Lewis 食管切除术后的死亡率相似。经胸组再次手术率为 24.0%,McKeown 组为 40.6%,Ivor Lewis 组为 41.3%(P<0.001)。经胸组 ICU 再入院率为 24.0%,McKeown 组为 37.8%,Ivor Lewis 组为 43.4%(P<0.001)。
本研究在吻合口漏患者中证实了临床后果的严重程度与不同类型食管切除术之间存在很强的关联。这支持了这样一种假设,即颈部吻合口漏通常比胸腔内吻合口漏严重程度较轻。在临床医生或研究人员比较不同类型的食管切除术时,除了吻合口漏的发生率外,还应考虑其严重程度。