Hand-sewn versus stapled anastomoses for esophagectomy: We will probably never know which is better.

OBJECTIVE

Esophagectomy remains the mainstay of treatment for nonmetastatic esophageal cancer. The optimal technique for anastomosis after esophagectomy remains unknown. The purpose of this systematic meta-analysis is to combine the available high-quality evidence to provide esophageal surgeons with an evidence base for their decision making.

METHODS

A systematic search of multiple databases was conducted to find randomized controlled trials of esophageal anastomotic techniques. A meta-analysis of the pooled data was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies with 2123 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis revealed a 102% higher incidence of anastomotic leak after hand-sewn anastomosis compared with stapled anastomosis (odds ratio [OR], 2.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48-2.75). Anastomotic stricture rate was also 31% higher with hand-sewn anastomosis (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.00-1.7). Thirty-day mortality did not show statistical difference favoring one anastomosis technique to another (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45-1.04). None of anastomotic leak rate, anastomotic stricture rate, or 30-day overall survival differed between anastomotic techniques in studies with only thoracic anastomoses. In cervical position hand-sewn anastomosis was associated with higher rate of anastomotic leak (OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.33-3.05) and stricture (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.15-2.72), but no difference in 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed a signal of higher rate of leak and stricture in hand-sewn anastomoses, but sensitivity analyses did not show a consistent outcome, so these results should be interpreted with caution.