Long-term outcomes of oesophageal atresia without or with proximal tracheooesophageal fistula - Gross types A and B.

PURPOSE: Because of an extended gap between esophageal pouches a variety of methods are employed to treat oesophageal atresia (OA) without (type A) or with (type B) proximal tracheooesophageal fistula. This retrospective observational study describes their single centre long-term outcomes from 1947 to 2014. METHODS: Of 693 patients treated for OA 68 (9.7%) had type A (n=58, 8.3%) or B (n=10, 1.4%). Hospital records were reviewed. Main outcome measures were survival and oral intake. RESULTS: Nine (13%) patients had early and 10 (15%) delayed primary anastomosis, 30 (44%) underwent reconstruction including colonic interposition (n=13), reversed gastric tube (n=11) and jejunum interposition (n=6), whereas19 (28%) had died without a definite repair. Median follow up was 35 (interquartile range, 7.4-40) years. Thirty-one (63%) of 49 patients with definitive repair survived long term. Survival was 22% for early and 80% for delayed primary anastomosis, 57% for colon interposition, 82% for gastric tube and 84% for jejunum interposition. Gastrooesophageal reflux was most common after gastric tube (80%), dysphagia after colon interposition (50%), and 3 (60%) of 5 survivors with jejunum interposition had permanent feeding ostomy because of neurological disorder. Endoscopic follow-up disclosed no oesophageal cancer or dysplasia. Repair in the most recent patients from 1985 to 2014 (n=14) included delayed primary anastomosis (n=7), jejunum interposition (n=6) and gastric tube (n=1) with 93% long-term survival. CONCLUSION: Morbidity among long-term survivors of type A or B OA is high. With modern management survival is, however, excellent and patients without neurological disorder achieve full oral intake either after primary anastomosis or reconstruction. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Long-term results of esophageal atresia: Helsinki experience and review of literature.

Esophageal atresia (EA) affects one in 2,840 newborns, and over half have associated anomalies that typically affect the midline. After EA repair in infancy, gastroesophageal reflux (GER) and esophageal dysmotility and respiratory problems are common. Significant esophageal morbidity associated with EA extends into adulthood. Surgical complications, increasing age, and impaired esophageal motility predict the development of epithelial metaplasia after repair of EA. To date, worldwide, six cases of esophageal cancer have been reported in young adults treated for EA. According to our data, the statistical risk for esophageal cancer is not higher than 500-fold that of the general population. However, the overall cancer incidence among adults with repaired EA does not differ from that of the general population. Adults with repaired EA have had significantly more respiratory symptoms and infections, as well as more asthma and allergies than does the general population. Nearly half the patients have bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Thoracotomy-induced rib fusion and gastroesophageal reflux-associated columnar epithelial metaplasia are the most significant risk factors for the restrictive ventilatory defect that occurs in over half the patients. Over half the patients with repaired EA are likely to develop scoliosis. Risk for scoliosis is 13-fold after repair of EA in relation to that of the general population. Nearly half of the patients have had vertebral anomalies predominating in the cervical spine, and of these, most were vertebral fusions. The natural history of spinal deformities seems, however, rather benign, with spinal surgery rarely indicated.

Esophageal morbidity and function in adults with repaired esophageal atresia with tracheoesophageal fistula: a population-based long-term follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed esophageal morbidity and relationships between surgical complications, symptoms, endoscopic findings, immunohistochemistry, and esophageal motility in adults with repaired esophageal atresia (EA). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There exist no previous population-based long-term follow-up studies on EA. METHODS: Participants were interviewed, and they underwent esophageal endoscopy and manometry. Matched control subjects (n = 287) served as controls. RESULTS: A total of 101 (42%) individuals representative of the entire study population participated at a mean age of 36 years (range, 21-57). Symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux had occurred in 34% and dysphagia in 85% of the patients and in 8% and 2% of the controls (P < 0.001 for both). Endoscopic findings included hiatal hernia (28%), Barrett's esophagus (11%), esophagitis (8%), and anastomotic stricture (8%). Immunohistochemistry revealed esophagitis in 25%, and CDX2-positive columnar epithelial metaplasia in 21%, with additional goblet cells and MUC2 positivity in 6%. Gastroesophageal reflux and dysphagia were equally common in individuals with normal histology, esophagitis, or epithelial metaplasia. Manometry demonstrated nonpropagating peristalsis in 80% of the patients, and low distal wave amplitudes of the esophagus in all the changes being significantly worse in those with epithelial metaplasia (P < or = 0.022 metaplasia vs. esophagitis/normal). Anastomotic complications (odds ratio [OR]: 8.6-24, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7-260, P = 0.011-0.008), age (OR: 20, 95% CI: 1.3-310, P = 0.034), low distal esophageal body pressure (OR: 2.6, 95% CI: 0.7-10, P = 0.002), and defective esophageal peristalsis (OR: 2.2, 95% CI: 0.4-11, P = 0.014) predicted development of epithelial metaplasia. CONCLUSIONS: Significant esophageal morbidity associated with EA extends into adulthood. Surgical complications, increasing age, and impaired esophageal motility predict development of epithelial metaplasia after repair of EA.

Natural history of spinal anomalies and scoliosis associated with esophageal atresia.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical characteristics of spinal deformities that commonly occur in patients with esophageal atresia (EA) are unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the incidence and natural history of spinal anomalies and scoliosis in patients with EA. METHODS: A population-based cohort of 100 adults who had an operation for EA in our hospital were examined clinically and radiographically for spinal deformities. The results were compared with data obtained from normal population-based controls. RESULTS: Vertebral anomalies were observed in 45 patients, predominating in the cervical spine in 38 patients. Any additional anomaly was the most significant risk factor (odds ratio [OR]: 27 [95% confidence interval (CI): 8-100]) for the occurrence of vertebral anomalies. Scoliosis of >10 degrees was observed in 56 patients, >20 degrees in 11 patients, and >45 degrees in 1 patient. The risk for scoliosis of >10 degrees was 13-fold (OR: 13 [95% CI: 8.3-21]), and the risk for scoliosis of >20 degrees was 38-fold (OR: 38 [95% CI: 14-106]) compared with those in the normal population. Thoracotomy-induced rib fusions (OR: 3.6 [95% CI: 0.7-19]) and other associated anomalies (OR: 2.1 [95% CI: 0.9-2.9]) were the strongest predictive factors for scoliosis. The general clinical course of spinal deformities was mild, and none of the patients had undergone spinal surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of scoliosis is 13-fold after repair of EA in relation to general population. Nearly half of the patients have vertebral anomalies predominating in the cervical spine. Most of these deformities were not diagnosed primarily or during growth. Spinal surgery is rarely indicated.

Cancer after repair of esophageal atresia: population-based long-term follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: Esophageal atresia (EA) predisposes to gastroesophageal reflux that is associated with intestinal metaplasia and may result in development of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. To date, the literature has reported 5 cases of esophageal cancer in adult patients treated for EA. The aim of this study was to find out the incidence of esophageal cancer in adult patients with repaired EA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hundred two consecutive patients treated for EA from 1949 to 1978 were followed-up for cancer through the files of the population-based countrywide cancer registry from 1967 to 2004. The number of cancer cases observed and person-years at risk were counted, and the expected number of cancer cases estimated from the national cancer incidence rates. The standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated by dividing the number of cancer cases observed by the expected numbers. RESULTS: None of the 502 patients were lost to follow-up; 230 patients who died before 1967 younger than the median age of 8 days were excluded from further analysis. The 272 remaining patients (142 males) were eligible for follow-up (median age, 35 years; range, 2 days to 56 years). Three cases of cancer were found (SIR, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-2.8). One was lymphoma in small intestine, 1 was leukemia, and 1 carcinoma of the uterus but no cases of esophageal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is able to exclude long-term risk for esophageal cancer after repair of EA 500-fold higher than that of the normal population. Considering the relatively young age of the survivors, further studies and continued follow-up are warranted to elucidate risk for esophageal cancer and need for endoscopic surveillance after repair of EA.