Substernal reconstruction following esophagectomy: operation of last resort?

dc.contributor.authorMoremen, Jacob R.
dc.contributor.authorCeppa, DuyKhanh P.
dc.contributor.authorRieger, Karen M.
dc.contributor.authorBirdas, Thomas J.
dc.contributor.departmentSurgery, School of Medicineen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-07T13:49:38Z
dc.date.available2018-06-07T13:49:38Z
dc.date.issued2017-12
dc.description.abstractBackground: The posterior mediastinum is the preferred location for reconstruction following esophagectomy. Occasionally alternative routes are required. We examined patient outcomes of esophageal reconstruction in order to determine whether substernal reconstruction (SR) is an equivalent alternative to orthotopic placement. Methods: Following IRB approval, we performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent an esophagectomy from 1988-2014. Only patients reconstructed with a gastric conduit and cervical anastomosis by either substernal or posterior mediastinal (PM) routes were included in the study. Endpoints assessed included anastomotic leak rate, post-operative complications, reoperation, hospital length of stay, and 30- and 90-day mortality. Results: Thirty-three patients underwent SR and 182 had a PM gastric conduit with cervical anastomosis. The SR pathology was predominantly benign while PM was mostly malignant. Sixteen SR patients had a delayed reconstruction after prior diversion. Mean hospital LOS was longer in the SR group (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in 30- and 90-day mortality. PM patients had significantly fewer respiratory complications (P<0.04), reoperations (P<0.04), and transfusions (P<0.0001) and a trend towards fewer anastomotic leaks (17.1% vs. 30.3%; P<0.09). Conclusions: This single institution experience demonstrated no significant difference in mortality between substernal and PM reconstruction following esophagectomy. However, SR was associated with significantly increased LOS and morbidity, including a trend toward increased anastomotic leaks. SR reconstruction should probably be considered an option of last resort.en_US
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen_US
dc.identifier.citationMoremen, J. R., Ceppa, D. P., Rieger, K. M., & Birdas, T. J. (2017). Substernal reconstruction following esophagectomy: operation of last resort? Journal of Thoracic Disease, 9(12), 5040–5045. http://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2017.11.51en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/16380
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherAME Publishing Companyen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.21037/jtd.2017.11.51en_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Thoracic Diseaseen_US
dc.rightsPublisher Policyen_US
dc.sourcePMCen_US
dc.subjectEsophagectomyen_US
dc.subjectOutcomesen_US
dc.subjectReconstructionen_US
dc.subjectSubsternalen_US
dc.titleSubsternal reconstruction following esophagectomy: operation of last resort?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
ul.alternative.fulltexthttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5757042/en_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
jtd-09-12-5040.pdf
Size:
191.75 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Main article
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: