J 2018

Comparison of cervical anastomotic leak and stenosis after oesophagectomy for carcinoma according to the interval of the stomach ischaemic conditioning

PROCHÁZKA, Vladimír, Filip MAREK, Lumír KUNOVSKÝ, Roman SVATOŇ, Tomáš GROLICH et. al.

Basic information

Original name

Comparison of cervical anastomotic leak and stenosis after oesophagectomy for carcinoma according to the interval of the stomach ischaemic conditioning

Authors

PROCHÁZKA, Vladimír (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Filip MAREK (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Lumír KUNOVSKÝ (203 Czech Republic, guarantor, belonging to the institution), Roman SVATOŇ (703 Slovakia, belonging to the institution), Tomáš GROLICH (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Petr MORAVČÍK (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Martina FARKAŠOVÁ (703 Slovakia, belonging to the institution) and Zdeněk KALA (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution)

Edition

ANNALS OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS OF ENGLAND, LONDON, ROYAL COLL SURGEONS ENGLAND, 2018, 0035-8843

Other information

Language

English

Type of outcome

Článek v odborném periodiku

Field of Study

30212 Surgery

Country of publisher

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Confidentiality degree

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Impact factor

Impact factor: 1.259

RIV identification code

RIV/00216224:14110/18:00104706

Organization unit

Faculty of Medicine

DOI

UT WoS

000448507400012

Keywords in English

Anastomotic leak; Anastomotic stenosis; Oesophageal carcinoma; Minimally invasive oesophagectomy; Stomach ischaemic conditioning

Tags

Tags

International impact, Reviewed
Změněno: 9/2/2019 21:47, Soňa Böhmová

Abstract

V originále

BACKGROUND Stomach preparation by ischaemic conditioning prior to oesophageal resection represents a potential method of reducing the risk of anastomotic complications. This study compares the results of the anastomotic complications of cervical anastomosis after oesophagectomy with a short interval after ischaemic conditioning (group S) and a long interval (group L). METHODS Subjects undergoing oesophagectomy for carcinoma after ischaemic conditioning were divided into two groups. Group S had a median interval between ischaemic conditioning and resection of 20 days, while for group L the median interval was 49 days. Anastomotic leak and anastomotic stenosis in relation to the interval between ischaemic conditioning and actual resection were followed. RESULTS After ischaemic conditioning, 33 subjects in total underwent surgery for carcinoma; 19 subjects in group S and 14 subjects in group L. Anastomotic leak incidence was comparable in both groups. Anastomotic stenosis occurred in 21% of cases in group S and 7% of cases in group L (not statistically significant). CONCLUSION A long interval between ischaemic conditioning and oesophagectomy does not adversely affect the postoperative complications. A lower incidence of anastomosis stenoses was found in subjects with a longer interval, however, given the size of our sample, the statistical significance was not demonstrated. Both groups seem comparable in surgical procedure course and postoperative complications.