Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: large, collaborative, observational TENTACLE cohort study.
Ubels, Sander; Verstegen, Moniek H P; Klarenbeek, Bastiaan R; Bouwense, Stefan; van Berge Henegouwen, Mark I; Daams, Freek; van Det, Marc J; Griffiths, Ewen A; Haveman, Jan Willem; Heisterkamp, Joos; Nieuwenhuijzen, Grard; Polat, Fatih; Schouten, Jeroen; Siersema, Peter D; Singh, Pritam; Wijnhoven, Bas; Hannink, Gerjon; van Workum, Frans; Rosman, Camiel.
  • Ubels S; Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • Verstegen MHP; Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • Klarenbeek BR; Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • Bouwense S; Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  • van Berge Henegouwen MI; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Daams F; Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • van Det MJ; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Griffiths EA; Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Haveman JW; Department of Surgery, ZGT Hospital Group, Almelo, The Netherlands.
  • Heisterkamp J; Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
  • Nieuwenhuijzen G; Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
  • Polat F; Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
  • Schouten J; Department of Surgery, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
  • Siersema PD; Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
  • Singh P; Department of Surgery, Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • Wijnhoven B; Department of Intensive Care, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • Hannink G; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • van Workum F; Department of Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.
  • Rosman C; Department of Surgery, Regional Oesophago-Gastric Unit, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK.
Br J Surg ; 110(7): 852-863, 2023 06 12.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37196149
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Anastomotic leak is a severe complication after oesophagectomy. Anastomotic leak has diverse clinical manifestations and the optimal treatment strategy is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of treatment strategies for different manifestations of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy.

METHODS:

A retrospective cohort study was performed in 71 centres worldwide and included patients with anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy (2011-2019). Different primary treatment strategies were compared for three different anastomotic leak manifestations interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (that is no intrathoracic collections; well perfused conduit); drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations; and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for confounders.

RESULTS:

Of 1508 patients with anastomotic leak, 28.2 per cent (425 patients) had local manifestations, 36.3 per cent (548 patients) had intrathoracic manifestations, 9.6 per cent (145 patients) had conduit ischaemia/necrosis, 17.5 per cent (264 patients) were allocated after multiple imputation, and 8.4 per cent (126 patients) were excluded. After propensity score matching, no statistically significant differences in 90-day mortality were found regarding interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (risk difference 3.2 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.8 to 8.2 per cent), drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations (risk difference 5.8 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.2 to 12.8 per cent), and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis (risk difference 0.1 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -21.4 to 1.6 per cent). In general, less morbidity was found after less extensive primary treatment strategies.

CONCLUSION:

Less extensive primary treatment of anastomotic leak was associated with less morbidity. A less extensive primary treatment approach may potentially be considered for anastomotic leak. Future studies are needed to confirm current findings and guide optimal treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias Esofágicas / Fuga Anastomótica Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias Esofágicas / Fuga Anastomótica Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article