Comparison of hand-sewn and stapled esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal resection for cancer: a prospective randomized controlled trial

S Law, M Fok, K M Chu, J Wong, S Law, M Fok, K M Chu, J Wong

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the hand-sewn and stapled methods in esophagogastric anastomosis.

Summary background data: After esophageal resection for cancer, the relative merits of the hand-sewn and the stapled methods of esophagogastric anastomosis, especially regarding leakage and stricture rates, have not adequately been studied.

Methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial was undertaken in 122 patients with squamous cell cancer of the thoracic esophagus who underwent a Lewis-Tanner esophagectomy. Patients were stratified according to esophageal size, based on the diameter of the divided esophagus (< or > or = 30 mm) and then were randomized to have either a hand-sewn or a stapled anastomosis.

Results: The mean total operating times (standard error of the mean) when the hand-sewn and the stapled methods were used were 214 (4) minutes and 217 (3.4) minutes, respectively (p = not significant [NS]). The respective in vivo proximal resection margins (standard error of the mean) were 8 (0.4) cm and 7.6 (0.4) cm (p = NS). Leakage rates were 1.6% and 4.9% (p = NS). Excluding hospital deaths, patients with leakage or anastomotic recurrence, and those who received radiation therapy to histologically infiltrated resection margin, anastomotic stricture was found in 5 (9.1%) of 55 patients in the hand-sewn group and 20 (40%) of 50 in the stapler group (p = 0.0003). The difference in stricture rates was significant in small as well as large esophagi. Anastomotic recurrence developed in only one patient in each group.

Conclusions: The authors conclude that both methods were safe, but the stapled technique resulted in more stricture formation.

References

    1. Ann Surg. 1981 Jun;193(6):825-30
    1. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1996 Feb;41(1):17-9
    1. Ann Surg. 1987 Feb;205(2):189-94
    1. Surgery. 1987 Apr;101(4):408-15
    1. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1987 Jun;164(6):568-72
    1. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1988 Apr;95(4):685-91
    1. Br J Surg. 1991 Mar;78(3):342-5
    1. Br J Surg. 1991 Nov;78(11):1297-300
    1. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1992 Aug;104(2):395-400
    1. Br J Surg. 1993 May;80(5):608-11
    1. World J Surg. 1994 May-Jun;18(3):339-46
    1. Ann Thorac Surg. 1994 Oct;58(4):1087-9; discussion 1089-90
    1. Am J Surg. 1995 Jun;169(6):634-40
    1. Br J Surg. 1996 Jan;83(1):107-11
    1. Am J Surg. 1984 Feb;147(2):283-7

Source: PubMed

3
订阅