The place of gastro-jejuno-duodenal interposition following limited esophageal resection

Objective: Although stomach is the best choice for reconstruction after esophagectomy from the viewpoint of safety and ease, an intrathoracic stomach, nevertheless, is a poor long-term substitute. This anatomical configuration abolishes normal antireflux mechanisms and places the acid-excreting stom...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEuropean journal of cardio-thoracic surgery Vol. 28; no. 2; pp. 296 - 300
Main Authors Altorjay, Áron, Kiss, János, Paál, Balázs, Tihanyi, Zoltán, Luka, Ferenc, Farsang, Zoltán, Asztalos, Imre, Altorjay, István
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Amsterdam Elsevier B.V 01.08.2005
Elsevier Science
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Objective: Although stomach is the best choice for reconstruction after esophagectomy from the viewpoint of safety and ease, an intrathoracic stomach, nevertheless, is a poor long-term substitute. This anatomical configuration abolishes normal antireflux mechanisms and places the acid-excreting stomach subject to biliary reflux, moreover, in an adjacent position to the esophagus within the negative-pressure environment of the thorax. Methods: Between 1995 and 2002, 27 patients with high-grade neoplasia—as early Barrett’s carcinoma—or non-dilatable peptic stricture underwent limited surgical resection of the distal esophagus and esophagogastric junction. In 11 of these cases, the reconstruction was performed with gastro-jejuno-duodenal interposition. The long-term functional results of this specially adapted form of interposition reconstruction have been evaluated. The postoperative follow-up period ranged between 24 and 95 months (mean 68 months). Nine patients (9/11=81.8%) have agreed to undergo endoscopy, radiographic contrast-swallow examination, and 24-h ambulatory esophageal pH and bilirubin monitoring. Results: Three out of nine patients (3/9=33%) demonstrated abnormal levels of esophageal acid exposure during the 24-h study period, whilst none had any evidence of bilirubin exposure in the esophageal remnant. Endoscopy revealed that three patients had reflux esophagitis in the remnant esophagus: Los Angeles A=2, C=1. No stomal or jejunal ulceration at the gastro-jejunal anastomosis could be observed. Histopathologic assessment of the squamous epithelial biopsies demonstrated microscopic evidence of inflammation: minor in two cases, moderate in one and major in one case; however, none of them had evidence of columnar metaplasia in the esophagal remnant at a median of 68 months after surgery. The majority of the patients have been doing well since the operation: 8/9 (88%)=Visick I–II. Conclusions: Gastro-jejuno-duodenal interposition represents an adequate ‘second-best’ method of choice if technical difficulties emerge with jejunal or colon interposition following limited resection of the esophagus performed due to early Barett’s carcinoma or non-dilatable peptic stricture.
Bibliography:ark:/67375/HXZ-TFQF9PXQ-J
istex:3CF3D5D16135874F36B6CB9609040C386A144086
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1010-7940
1873-734X
DOI:10.1016/j.ejcts.2005.04.039