Bruno Halimi

Can the morbidity of esophagectomy be reduced by the thoracoscopic approach

Esophagectomies have a high morbidity rate, mainly related to pulmonary complications. The aim of this work was to assess whether the thoracoscopic approach could reduce this morbidity. We have made a prospective study of the results of 29 attempts of esophagectomy using a right thoracoscopic approach. There were 20 males and 9 females having an average age of 47. The indication was a squamous cell carcinoma in 22 patients, an adenocarcinoma in 1 patient, a melanoma in 1 patient, and a caustic stenosis in 5. The whole esophagus was mobilized thoracoscopically and the esophagectomy was completed through the abdomen. The reconstruction was achieved using a gastric pull-through and a cervical anastomosis. There were five failures for the following reasons: unresectable carcinoma (one case), large tumor making a thoracoscopic dissection unsafe (two cases), and incomplete lung collapse making the exposure of the posterior mediastinum difficult (two cases). The average time of the thoracoscopic procedure was 135 min. The postoperative course was uneventful in all but five patients who had a pulmonary complication: atelectasis (three cases), right purulent pleural effusion (one case), acute respiratory disease syndrome (one case). The latter complication was lethal. Four out of five respiratory complications occurred in patients for whom the dissection was considered difficult. Among the other complications, there were five anastomotic leakages and three cases of laryngeal nerve palsy. The mortality rate was 3.8%. These initial results do not show a real benefit of the thoracoscopic approach for esophageal dissection, especially with respect to difficult esophagectomies. Further evaluation of the technique is needed.

Late morbidity after colon interposition for corrosive esophageal injury: risk factors, management, and outcome. A 20-years experience.

Objective:The aim of this study was to report our experience in the management of late morbidity after colonic interposition for caustic injury and to assess the influence of coloplasty dysfunction on patient outcome. Summary Background Data:Reports on coloplasty dysfunction after colon interposition for corrosive esophageal injuries are scarce in the literature. Dysfunction of the colonic substitute might jeopardize an already fragile functional result, and appropriate management can improve outcome. Methods:Long-term follow-up (>6 months) was conducted in 223 patients (125 men; median age, 35 years) who underwent colonic interposition for caustic injuries between 1987 and 2006. Statistical tests were performed on this cohort to identify risk factors for late morbidity and functional outcome. During the same period, 28 patients who underwent colon interposition for caustic injury in another center were referred for treatment of coloplasty dysfunction. Data from these patients were used together with those of our patients to describe specific coloplasty-related complications and their management. Results:With a median follow-up of 5 years (range: 6 months–20 years), late complications were recorded in 125 (55%) of our patients (stenosis 36%, reflux 11%, redundancy 5%). A delay in reconstruction <6 months (P = 0.03) and absence of thoracic inlet enlargement (P = 0.002) were independent predictive factors for cervical anastomotic stenosis. Functional failure was recorded in 52 patients (23%) and was associated with a delay in reconstruction <6 months (P = 0.009) and emergency tracheotomy (P = 0.002). Coloplasty dysfunction was responsible for half of the recorded failures. Revision surgery for coloplasty dysfunction was performed in 96 patients (68 local, 28 referred) with an overall 70% success rate. Conclusions:Late complications occurred in half of the patients after colonic interposition for corrosive injuries and accounted for half of the functional failures. Prolonged surgical follow-up and appropriate management of coloplasty dysfunction are key factors for long-term success after esophageal reconstruction for caustic injuries.

Reconstruction œsophagienne pour séquelles de brûlure caustique : coloplasties, mode d’emploi

Retrosternal coloplasty is the gold standard for esophageal reconstruction after caustic injury of the digestive tract. Complete preoperative otolaryngology evaluation and the control of the psychiatric disease are key factors for success. In the absence of controlled studies, the choice between the right and the left colon graft relies on the anatomy of the blood supply to the colon and on the individual surgeons preference. Treatment of associated pharyngeal and laryngeal injuries is mandatory at the time of esophageal reconstruction. In experienced hands mortality rates are less than 5% but specific postoperative complications (graft necrosis, leakage, anastomotic stricture) are high. The low risk of cancer development in the by-passed esophagus does not justify routine esophagectomy at the time of reconstruction. Sixty to eighty percent of patients would finally retrieve nutritional autonomy after coloplasty for caustic injury. Late acquired dysfunctions of the coloplasty (anastomotic strictures, graft redundancy) requiring revision surgery occur frequently and might jeopardize an already fragile functional result. Timely diagnosis and treatment of such complications and the necessity of continuous psychological surveillance justify the need for long term follow up in these patients.

Surgery for Caustic Injuries of the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract

Background:Surgery is the criterion standard for the treatment of severe burns and of late sequels after ingestion of corrosive agents, but long-term outcome is unknown. Methods:Patients who underwent surgery between 1987 and 2006, for the treatment of severe caustic burns (group I, n = 268) or of late sequels (group II, n = 79) were included in the study. Survival and functional outcomes were analyzed. Functional success was defined as nutritional autonomy after removal of the jejunostomy and tracheotomy tubes. To compare the observed mortality with the expected mortality in the general population, a standardized mortality ratio (SMR) was used. Results:Overall Kaplan-Meyer survival at 1, 5, 10, and 20 years of patients in group I was 76.4%, 63.6%, 53.9%, and 44.1%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, advanced age (P = 0.0021), extended resection (P = 0.0009), emergency esophagectomy (P = 0.013), and tracheobronchial injuries (P = 0.0011) were independent negative predictors of survival. The SMR of patients in group I was increased to 21.5 when compared to the general French population. Functional success was recorded in 147 (56%) patients in group I. Advanced age (P = 0.012), extended resection (P = 0.012), and emergency tracheotomy (P = 0.02) were independent predictors for failure. After esophageal reconstruction, patients in group II fared better than patients in group I in terms of survival (P = 0.0006) and functional success (P < 0.0001). Still, the SMR of patients in group II increased to 3.67. Conclusions:The need to perform surgery for caustic injuries has a persistent long-term negative impact on survival and functional outcome.

Upper digestive tract reconstruction for caustic injuries.

OBJECTIVE The aim of the study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of colopharyngoplasty and esophagocoloplasty for caustic injuries of the upper digestive tract. BACKGROUND Simultaneous esophageal and pharyngeal reconstruction by colopharyngoplasty allows regaining nutritional autonomy in patients with severe pharyngoesophageal caustic injuries. METHODS Patients who underwent upper digestive tract reconstruction for caustic injuries by colopharyngoplasty (n = 116) and esophagocoloplasty (n = 122) between 1993 and 2012 were included. Survival and functional outcomes were analyzed. Success was defined as nutritional autonomy after removal of the jejunostomy and tracheotomy tubes. Quality of life was assessed using the QLQ-OG25 and SF12v2 questionnaires. RESULTS Overall Kaplan-Meyer survival at 1, 5, and 10 years after colopharyngoplasty and esophagocoloplasty were 92%, 74%, 67% and 92%, 83%, 73%, respectively (P = 0.56). Quality of life and functional results (success: 57% vs 95%, P < 0.0001) were impaired after colopharyngoplasty. On multivariate analysis, older age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.94; confidence interval [CI]: 0.91-0.97 P < 0.0001) and pharyngeal reconstruction (OR: 0.05; CI: 0.02-0.13, P < 0.0001) were associated with failure. The decline in success with age was more pronounced after colopharyngoplasty with only 1 (7%) of 15 patients operated after the age of 55 being self-sufficient for eating and breathing. Laryngeal resection during colopharyngoplasty had no influence on success (54% vs 58%, P = 0.67) CONCLUSIONS:: The need to associate pharyngeal reconstruction during esophageal reconstruction for caustic injuries has a long-term negative impact on functional outcome.

Similar Outcomes After Primary and Secondary Esophagocoloplasty for Caustic Injuries

BACKGROUND The main purpose of the study was to report a comparative experience with primary and secondary esophagocoloplasty for caustic injuries. Secondary esophagocoloplasty is the main rescue option after graft loss, but data in the literature are scarce. METHODS The operative characteristics, postoperative course, and functional outcomes of 21 secondary and of 246 primary esophagocoloplasty operations performed for caustic injuries between 1987 and 2006 were compared. Intraoperative events requiring significant changes in the planned operative strategy, such as graft ischemia or necrosis, were recorded. Statistical tests were performed in both cohorts to identify factors predictive of postoperative graft necrosis. Univariate analysis was performed to identify factors predictive of functional failure after secondary esophagocoloplasty. RESULTS Operative mortality (5% vs 4%, p=0.56), morbidity (62% vs 59%, p=0.96), postoperative graft necrosis (14% vs 7%, p=0.16), and functional success (68% vs 70%, p=0.79) rates of the secondary and primary esophagocoloplasty operations were similar. Intraoperative graft ischemia at the time of secondary esophagocoloplasty was significantly associated with the risk of postoperative graft necrosis (p=0.015) and functional failure (p=0.046). At the time of primary esophagocoloplasty, intraoperative necrosis of the colon was the only independent predictive factor of postoperative graft necrosis (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS Secondary esophagocoloplasty is a safe and reliable salvage option after primary graft loss in patients with caustic injuries. Delayed esophagocoloplasty should be considered if intraoperative colon necrosis occurs at the time of primary reconstruction.