Tubular stomach or whole stomach for esophagectomy through cervico-thoraco-abdominal approach: a comparative clinical study on anastomotic leakage.

Background: Esophagectomy through cervico-thoraco-abdominal approach is a useful surgical technique in treating patients with esophageal cancer. However, the cervical reconstruction is also known to have a high rate of anastomotic leakage, as well as anastomotic stricture, intrathoracic stomach syndrome, reflux esophagitis and other complications, thereby influencing postoperative recovery and quality of life.

Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate whether tubular stomach is superior to whole stomach in reducing anastomotic leakage for esophageal reconstruction through the cervico-thoraco-abdominal (3-field) approach.

Methods: A total of 850 patients undergoing the 3-field esophagectomy were retrospectively included in this study and divided into a tubular stomach reconstruction group (Group A, n=453) and a whole stomach reconstruction group (Group B, n=397). All patients underwent esophagectomy through right thorax, left cervical part, abdominal triple incisions and done in esophageal reconstruction by hand-sewn two-layer anastomosis.

Results: Results revealed that in comparison with whole stomach, esophageal reconstruction with tubular stomach had a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage (5.5 vs. 9.3%, P<0.05), less manifestation of intrathoracic syndrome (3.3 vs. 9.8%, P<0.001) and less occurence of reflux esophagitis (5.1 vs. 11.1%, P<0.01). However, for the incidence of anastomotic stricture, there was no significant difference between the two groups (9.3 vs. 9.8%).

Conclusions: This observation study suggests that for esophageal cancer patients undergoing the 3-field esophagectomy tubular stomach is better than whole stomach for esophageal reconstruction as reflected by a reduced postoperative anastomotic leakage, intrathoracic syndrome and reflux esophagitis.