I.R.C.C.S. Ospedale Galeazzi - Sant'Ambrogio, Division of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Department of Surgery, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, University of Insubria, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy.
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2022 Dec;407(8):3297-3309. doi: 10.1007/s00423-022-02706-2. Epub 2022 Oct 15.
Different techniques have been described for esophagogastric anastomosis. Over the past decades, surgeons have been improving anastomotic techniques with a gradual shift from hand-sewn to stapled anastomosis. Nowadays, circular-stapled (CS) and linear-stapled (LS) anastomosis are commonly used during esophagectomy.
PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched up to June 2022. The included studies evaluated short-term outcomes for LS vs. CS anastomosis in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer. Primary outcomes were anastomotic leak (AL) and stricture (AS). Risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used as pooled effect size measures whereas 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were used to assess relative inference.
Eighteen studies (2861 patients) were included. Overall, 1371 (47.9%) underwent CS while 1490 (52.1%) LS. Compared to CS, LS was associated with a significantly reduced RR for AL (RR = 0.70; 95% CI 0.54-0.91; p < 0.01) and AS (RR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.20-0.51; p < 0.0001). Stratified subgroup analysis according to the level of anastomosis (cervical and thoracic) still shows a tendency toward reduced risk for LS. No differences were found for pneumonia (RR 0.78; p = 0.12), reflux esophagitis (RR 0.74; p = 0.36), operative time (SMD -0.25; p = 0.16), hospital length of stay (SMD 0.13; p = 0.51), and 30-day mortality (RR 1.26; p = 0.42).
LS anastomosis seems associated with a tendency toward a reduced risk for AL and AS. Although surgeon's own training and experience might direct the choice of esophagogastric anastomosis, our meta-analysis encourages the use of LS anastomosis.
已经描述了不同的食管胃吻合技术。在过去的几十年中,外科医生一直在通过从手工缝合到吻合器吻合的逐渐转变来改进吻合技术。如今,在食管癌切除术中,通常使用圆形吻合器(CS)和线性吻合器(LS)进行吻合。
检索了 PubMed、MEDLINE、Scopus 和 Web of Science,截至 2022 年 6 月。纳入的研究评估了癌症患者行食管癌切除术后 LS 与 CS 吻合的短期结局。主要结局是吻合口漏(AL)和吻合口狭窄(AS)。风险比(RR)和标准化均数差(SMD)用作汇总效应量的测量指标,95%置信区间(95%CI)用于评估相对推断。
纳入了 18 项研究(2861 例患者)。总体而言,1371 例(47.9%)接受 CS,1490 例(52.1%)接受 LS。与 CS 相比,LS 吻合口 AL(RR = 0.70;95%CI 0.54-0.91;p < 0.01)和 AS(RR = 0.32;95%CI 0.20-0.51;p < 0.0001)的 RR 显著降低。根据吻合部位(颈段和胸段)进行的分层亚组分析仍显示 LS 风险降低的趋势。肺炎(RR 0.78;p = 0.12)、反流性食管炎(RR 0.74;p = 0.36)、手术时间(SMD -0.25;p = 0.16)、住院时间(SMD 0.13;p = 0.51)和 30 天死亡率(RR 1.26;p = 0.42)无差异。
LS 吻合似乎与 AL 和 AS 的风险降低有关。尽管外科医生自身的培训和经验可能会影响食管胃吻合术的选择,但我们的荟萃分析鼓励使用 LS 吻合术。