Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Am Coll Surg. 2018 Jun;226(6):1045-1050. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.11.020. Epub 2017 Dec 7.

Slide Esophagoplasty vs End-to-End Anastomosis for Recalcitrant Esophageal Stricture after Esophageal Atresia Repair.

Author information

1
Department of Surgery, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
2
Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
3
Department of Surgery, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
4
Department of Surgery, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. Electronic address: russell.jennings@childrens.harvard.edu.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Anastomotic stricture is a common complication after esophageal atresia (EA) repair. Patients with a recalcitrant stricture may require surgical intervention. The technique of reanastomosis after stricture resection can affect patient outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN:

Patients with EA who underwent anastomotic stricture resection, from July 2010 to February 2017, were reviewed. After stricture resection, patients who had slide esophagoplasty performed were compared with those having conventional end-to-end anastomosis.

RESULTS:

Fifty patients underwent stricture repair surgery by slide esophagoplasty (n = 12) or end-to-end (n = 38) anastomosis technique at a median age of 14 months (interquartile range [IQR] 6 to 23 months). Significantly fewer patients required dilation therapy after slide esophagoplasty: 6 of 12 (50%) compared with 32 of 38 (84%) in the end-to-end group (p = 0.02). The number of dilation sessions was significantly lower in the slide group vs the end-to-end (p = 0.004) group, with a risk ratio confirming the approximately half the number of dilations for the slide approach (risk ratio 0.57, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.86). Steroid injection was combined with dilation in 3 of 12 (25%) vs 22 of 38 (58%) in the slide and end-to-end groups, respectively (p = 0.10). Stent placement was used in none of slide cases vs 8 of 38 (21%) in the end-to-end group (p = 0.17). Stricture incision was performed in 1 of 12 (8%) in the slide group and 11 of 38 (29%) in the end-to-end group (p = 0.25). There were leak complications in fewer patients after slide esophagoplasty compared with end-to-end anastomosis: 1 of 12 (8%) vs 8 of 38 (21%) (p = 0.43).

CONCLUSIONS:

Slide esophagoplasty may be a useful technique of anastomotic configuration for selected patients with recalcitrant esophageal stricture, offering more favorable outcomes compared with end-to-end anastomosis.

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center