Search

There is no consensus on the timing of extubation after esophagectomy. There is a fear that premature extubation may result in a high risk of urgent reintubation. On the other hand, there is a risk of lung damage in prolonged intubation. The present systematic review compares early and late extubation. Five articles were selected. Early extubation after esophagectomy does not increase the risk of reintubation, mortality, complications, and length of stay.

This study aims to estimate whether prophylactic cervical lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer influences the short- and long-term results through a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Twenty-eight articles were selected in this systematic review, encompassing 9180 patients. Prophylactic neck lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer should be performed with caution, as it is associated with worse short-term results compared to traditional two-field lymphadenectomy and does not improve long-term survival.

Megaesophagus progress to sigmoid megaesophagus (SM) in 10–15% of patients, presenting tortuosity and sigmoid colon aspect. Esophagectomy is the choice treatment but is associated with high complications and mortality rates. To avoid the esophagectomy inherent morbidity, several authors recommend Heller myotomy (HM) with pull-down technique for SM, mainly for patients with comorbidities and the elderly. This systematic review and meta-analysis is the first to analyze the effectiveness of HM for treating SM. Methods A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library Central, Lilacs (BVS), and manual search of references. Inclusion criteria were: a) clinical trials, cohort studies, case series; b) patients with SM and esophageal diameter ≥ 6 cm; and c) patients undergoing primary myotomy. The exclusion criteria were: a) reviews, case reports, cross-sectional studies, editorials, letters, congress abstracts, full-text unavailability; b) animal studies, c) previous surgical treatment for achalasia; and d) pediatric studies. There were no restrictions on language or date of publication, and no filters were applied for the selection process. Random model and a 95% confidence interval (CI) were used. Results Sixteen articles were selected, encompassing 231 patients. The mean age ranged from 36 to 61 years old, and the mean follow-up ranged from 16 to 109 months. The analyzed outcomes include mortality, complications (pneumonia, pneumothorax, gastroesophageal reflux), need for reintervention (remyotomy, dilation and esophagectomy), and results classified as ‘good’ and ‘excellent’. Mortality rate was 0.035 (CI: 0.017–0.07; p Conclusion Heller myotomy is an option for avoiding esophagectomy in achalasia, with a low morbimortality rate and good results. It is effective for most patients but will fail in a minority of patients and demand retreatment, be it a remyotomy, endoscopic treatment or esophagectomy.

The complications related to esophagojejunal anastomosis are among the leading issues in the postoperative period of total gastrectomy. This review aims to evaluate the surgical outcomes of hand-sewn esophageal anastomosis compared to mechanical anastomosis for the reconstruction of total gastrectomy. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies evaluating hand-sewn and stapled anastomosis was performed. Results A total of 12 studies were selected, comprising 1761 individuals. The operation time was higher in the hand-sewn anastomosis group (mean difference [MD] = 22.13 minutes; 95%CI: 3.97, 40.29). However, the risk for anastomotic fistula was not different between the groups (difference risk [DR] = 0.00; 95%CI: −0.03, 0.03). Also, the rate of intracavitary abscess (DR = -0.02; 95%CI: −0.07, 0.02); the reoperation rate (DR = -0.00; 95%CI: −0.01, 0.01); postoperative complications (DR = 0.12; 95%CI: −0.01, 0.25); postoperative mortality (DR = 0.02; 95%CI: −0.02, 0.06); anastomotic stenosis (DR = -0.01; 95%CI: −0.03, 0.00); and length of hospital stay (mean difference [MD] = 3.52 days; 95%CI: −0.49, 7.53) were no different between groups. Conclusion The results indicate that the hand-sewn and stapled esophageal anastomosis have similar surgical outcomes. Stapled anastomosis has a shorter operation time being.

One of the main complications related to esophagogastric surgery, due to esophageal and gastric cancer, is the anastomotic leak. The placement of endoluminal stents is the most frequent endoscopic therapy in these cases. However, since its introduction, endoscopic vacuum therapy has been shown to be a promising alternative. This study primarily aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic vacuum therapy for the treatment of anastomotic leak in esophagectomy and total gastrectomy. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Studies that evaluated the use of endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic leak in esophagectomy and total gastrectomy were included. Results Twenty-three articles were included. A total of 559 patients were evaluated. Endoscopic vacuum therapy showed a fistulous orifice closure rate of 81.6% (rate: 0.816; 95% CI: 0.777–0.864) and, when compared to the stent, there is a 16% difference in favor of endoscopic vacuum therapy (risk difference [RD]: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.05–0.27). The risk for mortality in the endoscopic vacuum therapy was 10% lower than in endoluminal stent therapy (RD: −0.10; 95% CI: −0.18 to −0.02). Conclusion Endoscopic vacuum therapy might have a higher rate of fistulous orifice closure and a lower rate of mortality, compared to intraluminal stenting.

Esophagectomy has high morbidity and mortality, mainly due to pulmonary complications. Consequently, ventilatory support is a cornerstone in postoperative management. However, there is still no consensus on the timing for extubation. There is a fear that untimely extubation would lead to a high risk for an urgent reintubation. On the other hand, there is a risk for pulmonary damage in prolonged intubation. Thus, the present study aimed to compare early and late extubation after esophagectomy. Methods A systematic review was carried out on PubMed, Lilacs, Cochrane Library Central, and Embase, comparing early and late extubation after esophagectomy. The primary outcome was reintubation. Secondary outcomes included mortality; complications; pulmonary complications; pneumonia; anastomotic fistula; length of hospital stay; and ICU length of stay. The inclusion criteria were: a) clinical trials and cohort studies; b) adult patients (> 18 years); and c) patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy. The results were summarized by risk difference and mean difference. 95% confidence interval and random model were applied. Results Four articles were selected, comprising 490 patients. Early extubation did not increase the risk for reintubation, with a risk difference of 0.01 (95%CI -0.03; 0.04). Also, there was no difference for mortality −0.01 (95%CI -0.04; 0.03); complications −0.09 (95%CI -0.22; 0.05); pulmonary complications −0.05 (95%CI -0.13; 0.03); pneumonia −0.06 (95% CI-0.18; 0.05); anastomotic fistula −0.01 (95% CI -0.09; 0.08). In addition, there was no significant mean difference for: length of hospital stay −0.10 (95%CI -0.38; 0.1); and ICU length of stay 0.00 (95%CI -0.22; 0.22). Conclusion Early extubation after esophagectomy does not increase the risk for reintubation, mortality, complications, and lenght of stay.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a widely studied and highly prevalent condition. However, few is reported about the exact efficacy and safety of fundoplication (FPT) compared to oral intake proton-pump inhibitors (PPI). This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT) aims to compare PPI and FPT in relation to the efficacy, as well as the adverse events associated with these therapies. Methods This systematic review was guided by PRISMA statement. Search carried out in June 2020 was conducted on Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE and LILACS. The inclusion criteria were (I) patients with GERD; (II) Randomized clinical trials, comparing oral intake PPI with FPT; (III) relevant outcomes for this review. The exclusion criteria were (I) reviews, case reports, editorials and letters (II) transoral or endoscopic FPT (III) studies with no full text. No restrictions were set for language or period. Certainty of evidence and risk of bias were assessed with GRADE Pro and with Review Manager Version 5.4 bias assessment tool. Results Ten RCT were included. Meta-analysis showed that heartburn (RD = −0.19; 95% CI = −0.29, −0.09) was less frequently reported by patients that underwent FPT. Furthermore, patients undergoing surgery had greater pressure on the lower esophageal sphincter than those who used PPI (MD = 7.81; 95% CI 4.79, 10.83). There was no significant difference between groups in the percentage of time with pH less than 4 in 24 hours, sustained remission and Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale. Finally, FPT did not increase significantly the risk for adverse events such as postoperative dysphagia and impaired belching. Conclusion FPT is a more effective therapy than PPI treatment for GERD, without significantly increasing the risk for adverse events. However, before indicating a possible surgical approach, it is extremely important to correctly assess and select the patients who would benefit from FPT, such as those with severe erosive esophagitis, severe respiratory symptoms, low adherence to continuous drug treatment and patients with non-acid reflux, to ensure better results.

During esophagectomy for cancer, there is no consensus if prophylactic thoracic duct ligation (TDL), with or without thoracic duct resection (TDR), could influence the perioperative outcomes and long-term survival. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared patients who went through esophagectomy associated or not to ligation or resection of the thoracic duct. Methods A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library Central and Lilacs (BVS). The inclusion criteria were: (1) studies that compare thoracic duct ligation, with or without resection, and non-thoracic duct ligation; (2) involve adult patients with esophageal cancer; (3) articles that analyses the outcomes—perioperative complications, perioperative mortality, chylothorax development and overall survival; (4) only clinical trials and cohort were accepted. A 95% confidence interval (CI) was used, and random-effects model was performed. Results Fifteen articles were selected, comprising 6,249 patients. TDL did not reduce the risk for chylothorax (Risk difference [RD]: -0.01; 95%CI: −0.02, 0.00). Also, TDL did not influence the risk for complications (RD: -0.02; 95%CI: −0.11, 0.07); mortality (RD: 0.00; 95%CI: −0.00, 0.00); and reoperation rate (RD: -0.01; 95%CI: −0.02, 0.00). TDR was associated with higher risk for postoperative complications (RD: 0.1; 95%CI 0.00, 0.19); chylothorax (RD: 0.02; 95%CI 0.00, 0.03). Both TDL and TDR did not influence the overall survival rate (TDL: HR: 1.17; 95%CI: 0.86, 1.48; and TDR: HR: 1.16; 95%CI: 0.8, 1.51). Conclusion Thoracic duct obliteration with or without its resection during esophagectomy does not change long term survival. Nonetheless, TDR increased the risk for postoperative complications and chylothorax.

Nowadays, there is still no consensus about the benefits of adding neck lymphadenectomy to the traditional two-fields esophagectomy. An extended lymphadenectomy could potentially increase operation time and the risks for postoperative complications. However, extended lymphadenectomy allows resection of cervical nodes at risk for metastases, potentially increasing long-term survival rates. This study aims to estimate whether cervical prophylactic lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer influences short- and long-term outcomes through a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis. Methods A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library Central, and Lilacs (BVS). The inclusion criteria were: (1) studies that compare two-field vs. three-field esophagectomy; (2) adults (>18 years); (3) articles that analyze short- or long-term outcomes; and (4) clinical trials or cohort studies. The results were summarized by forest plots, with effect size (ES) or risk difference (RD) and 95% CI. Results Twenty-five articles were selected, comprising 8,954 patients. Three-field lymphadenectomy was associated to higher operation time (ES: -1.51; 95%CI -1.84, −1.18) and higher blood loss (ES: -0.24; 95%CI: −0.37, −0.11). Also, neck lymphadenectomy inputs additional risk for pulmonary complications (RD: 0.03; 95%CI: 0.01, 0.05). No difference was noted for morbidity (RD: 0.01; 95%CI: −0.01, 0.03); leak (−0.02; 95%CI: −0.07, 0.03); postoperative mortality (RD: 0.00; 95%CI: −0.00, 0.01), and hospital stay (ES: -0.05; 95%CI -0.20, 0.10). Three-field lymphadenectomy allowed higher number of retrieved lymph nodes (MD: -1.51; 95%CI -1.84, −1.18), but did not increase the overall survival (HR: 1.11; 95%CI: 0.96, 1.26). Conclusion Prophylactic neck lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer should be performed with caution once it is associated with poorer short-term outcomes compared to traditional two-field lymphadenectomy and does not improve long-term survival. Future esophageal cancer studies should determine the subgroup of patients who could benefit from prophylactic neck lymphadenectomy in long-term outcomes.

Summary Introduction: Achalasia may evolve to sigmoid megaesophagus in 10–15% of patients and is usually treated with esophagectomy, which has high morbi-mortality. Many surgeons debate the applicability of the Heller myotomy for treating sigmoid megaesophagus. This study intents to analyze the effectiveness of myotomy for treating patients with sigmoid megaesophagus. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, Lilacs and Embase alongside manual search of references. The inclusion criteria were clinical trials, cohort, case-series; patients with sigmoid megaesophagus and esophageal diameter ≥ 6 cm; and patients undergoing primary myotomy. The exclusion criteria were reviews, case reports, cross-sectional studies, editorials, letters, congress abstracts, full-text unavailability; previous surgical treatment for achalasia; and pediatric or animal model studies. No restrictions on language and date of publication, and no filters were applied. Subgroups analyses were performed to assess the laparoscopic myotomy perioperative outcomes. Besides, subgroup analyses were performed to assess the long-term outcomes of the studies with a follow-up time > 24 months. To verify heterogeneity, the I2 test was used. The random effects were applied, and the fixed model was evaluated as sensitivity analysis. To assess risk of bias and certainty of evidence, the tools ROBINS-I and GRADE were used, respectively. Registration number: CRD42020199667. Results: Sixteen articles were selected, encompassing 350 patients. The mean age ranged from 36 to 61 years old, and the mean follow-up ranged from 16 to 109 months. Complications rate was 0.08 (CI: 0.040–0.153; P = 0.01). Need for retreatment rate was 0.128 (CI: 0.031–0.409; P = 0.01). The probability of good or excellent outcomes after myotomy was 0.762 (CI: 0.703–0.812; P