Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Incidence of food residue interfering with postoperative endoscopic examination for gastric pull-up after esophagectomy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Esophagus Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In spite of appropriate preparation, food residue that interferes with endoscopic examination is occasionally observed in an operated stomach. The present study aimed to elucidate the incidence of such food residue and determine its risk factors in gastric pull-up after esophagectomy.

Methods

A total of 116 esophagectomized patients underwent the first postoperative endoscopy to survey their gastric pull-up with a median interval of 14 months (range 6–24) after the surgery. Fasting time was 13–16 h before the examination. The amount of food residue was retrospectively classified from Grade 0 (no food residue) to Grade 4 (a large amount of food residue) by two expert endoscopists.

Results

Among the 116 patients, 73 patients were classified as Grade 0, 23 patients as Grade 1, 10 patients as Grade 2, 9 patients as Grade 3, and 1 patient as Grade 4. Food residue (≥Grade 2) that interfered with the examination was observed in 20 patients (17.2 %). There was no significant association between the food residue and patient baseline characteristics.

Conclusion

The food residue interfering with postoperative endoscopic examination was observed in 17.2 % of all surveyed gastric pull-ups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:69–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ando N, Ozawa S, Kitagawa Y, et al. Improvement in the results of surgical treatment of advanced squamous esophageal carcinoma during 15 consecutive years. Ann Surg. 2000;232:225–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Ozawa S, Tachimori Y, Baba H, et al. Comprehensive registry of esophageal cancer in Japan, 2004. Esophagus. 2012;9:75–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Okamoto N, Ozawa S, Kitagawa Y, et al. Metachronous gastric carcinoma from a gastric tube after radical surgery for esophageal carcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77:1189–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sugiura T, Kato H, Tachimori Y, et al. Second primary carcinoma in the gastric tube constructed as an esophageal substitute after esophagectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2002;194:578–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jablonski S, Piskorz L, Wawrzycki M. Gastric tube resection due to metachronic cancer and a recurrence in anastomosis after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy—case report. World J Surg Oncol. 2012;10:83.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Ikeda Y, Tobari S, Niimi M, et al. Second primary double carcinomas of the residual cervical esophagus and the gastric tube after thoracic esophagectomy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2003;125:1561–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nonaka S, Oda I, Sato C, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric tube cancer after esophagectomy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;79:260–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Oki E, Morita M, Toh Y, et al. Gastric cancer in the reconstructed gastric tube after radical esophagectomy: a single-center experience. Surg Today. 2011;41:966–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cho SB, Yoon KW, Park SY, et al. Risk factors for food residue after distal gastrectomy and a new effective preparation for endoscopy: the water-intake method. Gut Liver. 2009;3:186–91.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Ahn JY, Jung HY, Bae SE, et al. Proper preparation to reduce endoscopic reexamination due to food residue after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:910–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nakabayashi T, Mochiki E, Garcia M, et al. Gastropyloric motor activity and the effects of erythromycin given orally after esophagectomy. Am J Surg. 2002;183:317–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kubo M, Sasako M, Gotoda T, et al. Endoscopic evaluation of the remnant stomach after gastrectomy: proposal for a new classification. Gastric Cancer. 2002;5:83–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jung HJ, Lee JH, Ryu KW, et al. The influence of reconstruction methods on food retention phenomenon in the remnant stomach after a subtotal gastrectomy. J Surg Oncol. 2008;98:11–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nozaki I, Hato S, Yamashita M, et al. Hand-sewn anastomotic technique after esophageal cancer resection. Hepatogastroenterology. 2014;61:1957–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Law S, Fok M, Chu KM, et al. Comparison of hand-sewn and stapled esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal resection for cancer: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 1997;226:169–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Mukaide H, Inoue K, Fukui J, et al. Water for the preparation of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy after gastrectomy. Gan Kagaku Ryoho. 2014;40:609–12.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Akkerman RD, Haverkamp L, van Hillegersberg R, et al. Surgical techniques to prevent delayed gastric emptying after esophagectomy with gastric interposition: a systematic review. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014;98:1512–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lee HS, Kim MS, Lee JM, et al. Intrathoracic gastric emptying of solid food after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;80:443–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wormald JC, Bennett J, van Leuven M, et al. Does the site of anastomosis for esophagectomy affect long-term quality of life? Dis Esophagus. 2014. doi:10.1111/dote.12301.

  21. Schmidt CE, Bestmann B, Kuchler T, et al. Quality of life associated with surgery for esophageal cancer: differences between collar and intrathoracic anastomoses. World J Surg. 2004;28:355–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim HK, Choi YH, Shim JH, et al. Endoscopic evaluation of the quality of the anastomosis after esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction. World J Surg. 2008;32:2010–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Izbeki F, Wittmann T, Odor S, et al. Synchronous electrogastrographic and manometric study of the stomach as an esophageal substitute. World J Gastroenterol. 2005;11:1172–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research is supported by the Practical Research for Innovative Cancer Control from Japan Agency for Medical Research and development, AMED.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Shikoku Cancer Center, 160 Minami-umemoto, Matsuyama, 791-0280, Japan

    Isao Nozaki, Shinji Hato & Akira Kurita

  2. Internal Medicine, Shikoku Cancer Center, Matsuyama, Japan

    Shinichirou Hori & Norifumi Nishide

Authors
  1. Isao Nozaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shinji Hato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shinichirou Hori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Norifumi Nishide
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Akira Kurita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Isao Nozaki.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Statement

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and later versions. We have protected the privacy of the patient, and the manuscript does not include any identifying information. The present study was approved by the local ethics committee at the Shikoku Cancer Center.

Conflict of interest

Drs. Isao Nozaki, Shinji Hato, Shinichirou Hori, Norifumi Nishide, and Akira Kurita declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nozaki, I., Hato, S., Hori, S. et al. Incidence of food residue interfering with postoperative endoscopic examination for gastric pull-up after esophagectomy. Esophagus 13, 195–199 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10388-015-0516-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10388-015-0516-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation