Skip to main content
Log in

Intestinal interposition for benign esophageal disease

  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

Various options exist for intestinal interposition for benign, but debilitating, end-stage esophageal disorders. Principally, the stomach, colon, or jejunum is used for esophageal replacement. Much debate exists regarding the ideal esophageal replacement option. The conduit choice must be tailored to the individual patient. Unlike malignant processes, the conduit choice for benign disorders must be sufficiently durable and functional. Colonic interposition meets both criteria. However, this operative procedure’s technical difficulty increases the complexity of this already challenging clinical problem, as seemingly small errors in judgment and technique can significantly impact graft viability and long-term function. Using a gastric tube also provides durability and functionality, but with an operative procedure that is less technically demanding. A minimally invasive laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy offers the patient even more benefit in terms of shorter operative times and intensive care unit and recovery periods. However, the advent of surgical robotic technology augments these benefits even further. Robotic technology arms the surgeon with improved dexterity and three-dimensional visualization. These revolutionary improvements allow the surgeon to overcome many of the operative limitations that exist with the open and minimally invasive approaches to esophagectomy, thus potentially offering patients reduced morbidity and mortality rates.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Niemcryk SJ, Joshua-Gotlib S, Levine DS: Outpatient experience of patients with GERD in the United States: analysis of the 1998–2001 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Dig Dis Sci 2005, 50:1904–1908.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Watson TJ, DeMeester TR, Kauer WK, et al.: Esophageal replacement for end-stage benign esophageal disease. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998, 115:1241–1247; discussion 1247–1249.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Orringer MB, Marshall B, Iannettoni MD: Transhiatal esophagectomy for treatment of benign and malignant esophageal disease. World J Surg 2001, 25:196–203.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Young MM, Dechamps C, Trastek VF, et al.: Esophageal reconstruction for benign disease: early morbidity, mortality, and functional results. Ann Thorac Surg 2000, 70:1651–1655.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ferguson DD: Evaluation and management of benign esophageal strictures. Dis Esophagus 2005, 18:359–364.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Repici A, Conio M, De Angelis C, et al.: Temporary placement of an expandable polyester silicone-covered stent for treatment of refractory benign esophageal strictures. Gastrointest Endosc 2004, 60:513–519.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Schubert D, Kuhn R, Lippert H, Pross M: Endoscopic treatment of benign gastrointestinal anastomotic strictures using argon plasma coagulation in combination with diathermy. Surg Endosc 2003, 17:1579–1582.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Petruzziello L, Costamagna G: Stenting in esophageal strictures. Dig Dis 2002, 20:154–166.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gupta NM, Gupta R: Transhiatal esophageal resection for corrosive injury. Ann Surg 2004, 239:359–363.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dimick JB, Wainess RM, Upchurch GR, Jr, et al.: National trends in outcomes for esophageal resection. Ann Thorac Surg 2005, 79:212–216; discussion 217–218.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Luketich JD, Alvelo-Rivera M, Buenaventura PO, et al.: Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg 2003, 238:486–494; discussion 494–495.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Galvani CA, Gorodner MV, Moser F, et al.: Robotically assisted laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy. Surg Endosc 2007 [Epub ahead of print.]

  13. Urschel JD: Does the interponat affect outcome after esophagectomy for cancer? Dis Esophagus 2001, 14:124–130.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mansour KA, Bryan FC, Carlson GW: Bowel interposition for esophageal replacement: twenty-five-year experience. Ann Thorac Surg 1997, 64:752–756.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Renzulli P, Joeris A, Strobel O, et al.: Colon interposition for esophageal replacement: a single-center experience. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2004, 389:128–133.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. DeMeester TR, Johannson KE, Franze I, et al.: Indications, surgical technique, and long-term functional results of colon interposition or bypass. Ann Surg 1988, 208:460–474.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Young MM, Deschamps C, Allen MS, et al.: Esophageal reconstruction for benign disease: self-assessment of functional outcome and quality of life. Ann Thorac Surg 2000, 70:1799–1802.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kirby JD: Quality of life after oesophagectomy: the patients’ perspective. Dis Esophagus 1999, 12:168–171.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Horgan S, Berger RA, Elli EF, Espat NJ: Robotic-assisted minimally invasive transhiatal esophagectomy. Am Surg 2003, 69:624–626.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Briel JW, Tamhankar AP, Hagen JA, et al.: Prevalence and risk factors for ischemia, leak, and stricture of esophageal anastomosis: gastric pull-up versus colon interposition. J Am Coll Surg 2004, 198:536–541; discussion 541–542.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Domreis JS, Jobe BA, Aye RW, et al.: Management of long-term failure after colon interposition for benign disease. Am J Surg 2002, 183:544–546.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Thomas P, Fuentes P, Giudicelli R, Reboud E: Colon interposition for esophageal replacement: current indications and long-term function. Ann Thorac Surg 1997, 64:757–764.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Scott-Conner CE: Operations to replace or bypass the esophagus. In Chassin’s Operative Strategy in General Surgery: An Expositive Atlas. Edited by Scott-Conner CE. New York: Springer; 2002:139–150.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlos Galvani.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bueno, R.S., Galvani, C. & Horgan, S. Intestinal interposition for benign esophageal disease. Curr Treat Options Gastro 11, 43–53 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-008-0006-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-008-0006-x

Keywords

Navigation