Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Methods of reconstruction after esophagectomy on long-term health-related quality of life: a prospective, randomized study of 5-year follow-up

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Medical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The health-related quality of life (HRQL) is generally accepted as an important parameter for patients undergoing oncologic surgery. We conducted this prospective, randomized study to compare the effect of narrow gastric tube (NGT) reconstruction and whole-stomach (WS) reconstruction on the long-term HRQL in patients after esophagectomy. One hundred and four patients undergoing esophagectomy were enrolled in our study from 2007 to 2008, with 52 in NGT group and 52 in WS group. A questionnaire with reference to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OES18 was used to assess the HRQL at 3 weeks, 6 months, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years after esophagectomy. Data collection and follow-up were performed regularly. No significant difference was found between NGT group and WS group in the patients’ baseline characteristics. Patients in NGT group had decreased risk of postoperative reflux esophagitis by comparison with those in WS group. The 5-year cumulative survival rate was 42 % (NGT) and 27 % (WS), respectively. Compared with WS group, a significant increased survival rate (P = 0.027) was found in NGT group. Additionally, patients had lower dysphagia scores (better) in NGT group than those in WS group at 5 years after esophagectomy (P < 0.05). However, the scores of the other scales did not show statistical difference at 5-year follow-up. NGT is a better option for the reconstruction after esophagectomy because of decreased risk of postoperative complication, increased survival rate, and better HRQL, and NGT should be preferred to be recommended for patients undergoing esophagectomy.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rice T, Rush V, Apperson Hansen C, et al. Worldwide esophageal cancer collaboration. Dis Esophagus. 2009;22(1):1–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. McLarty AJ, Deschamps C, Trastek VF, et al. Esophageal resection for cancer of the esophagus: long-term function and quality of life. Ann Thorac Surg. 1997;63(6):1568–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 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(4):355–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Blazeby JM, Farndon JR, Donovan J, Alderson D. A prospective longitudinal study examining the quality of life of patients with esophageal carcinoma. Cancer. 2000;88(8):1781–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brooks JA, Kesler KA, Johnson CS, et al. Prospective analysis of quality of life after surgical resection for esophageal cancer: preliminary results. J Surg Oncol. 2002;81(4):185–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lauschke H, Tolba R, Hirner A. History of surgical esophageal replacement. Chirurg. 2001;72(8):973–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Judith B, Daan PL, Sjoerd GE, et al. International servery on esophageal cancer: part I surgical techniques. Dis Esophagus. 2009;22:195–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Akiyama H, Miyazono H, Tsurumaru M, et al. Use of the stomach as an esophageal substitute. Ann Surg. 1978;188(5):606–10.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Yamamoto S, Makuuchi H, Shimada H, et al. Clinical analysis of reflux esophagitis following esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction. J Gastroenterol. 2007;42(5):342–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang C, Wu QC, Hou PY, et al. Impact of the method of reconstruction after oncologic oesophagectomy on quality of life–a prospective, randomised study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011;39:109–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Collard JM, Otte JB, Reynaert M, Kestens PJ. Quality of life three years or more after esophagectomy for cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1992;104:391–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Koichiro S, Satoshi I, Masafumi S, et al. Chest pain and ST segment depression caused by expansion of gastric tube used for esophageal reconstruction. Intern Med. 2005;44(3):217–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Tetsuya T, Terunal A, Takao S, et al. Marked reversible ST-T abnormalities induced by cardiac compression from a retrosternal gastric tube used to reconstruct the esophagus after tumor resection. Int Heart J. 2006;47(3):475–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Walther B, Johansson J, Johnsson F, et al. Cervical or thoracic anastomosis after esophageal resection and gastric tube reconstruction: a prospective randomized trial comparing sutured neck anastomosis with stapled intrathoracic anastomosis. Ann Surg. 2003;238(6):803–12.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bonavina L, Anselmino M, Ruol A, et al. Functional evaluation of the intrathoracic stomach as an oesophageal substitute. Br J Surg. 1992;79:529–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Domergue J, Veyrac M, Huin-Yan S, et al. pH monitoring for 24 hours of gastroesophageal reflux and gastric function after intrathoracic gastroplasty after esophagectomy. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1990;171:107–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gutschow C, Collard JM, Romagnoli R, Salizzoni M, Holscher A. Denervated stomach as an esophageal substitute recovers intraluminal acidity with time. Ann Surg. 2001;233:509–14.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Poghosyan T, Gaujoux S, Chirica M, et al. Functional disorders and quality of life after esophagectomy and gastric tube reconstruction for cancer. J Visc Surg. 2011;148(5):e327–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zhang M, Wu QC, Li Q, et al. Comparison of the health-related quality of life in patients with narrow gastric tube and whole stomach reconstruction after oncologic esophagectomy: a prospective randomized study. Scand J Surg. 2013;102(2):77–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Takeuchi H, Kawakubo H, Saikawa Y, Omori T, Kitagawa Y. Clinical significance of micrometastases in patients with esophageal cancer. Nihon Geka Gakkai Zasshi. 2013;114(1):9–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Egberts JH, Schniewind B, Bestmann B, et al. Impact of the site of anastomosis after oncologic esophagectomy on quality of life: a prospective, longitudinal outcome study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(2):566–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. van Heijl M, Gooszen JA, Fockens P, et al. Risk factors for development of benign cervical strictures after esophagectomy. Ann Surg. 2010;251:1064–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sutcliffe RP, Forshaw MJ, Tandon R, et al. Anastomotic strictures and delayed gastric emptying after esophagectomy: incidence, risk factors and management. Dis Esophagus. 2008;21:712–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Blazeby JM, Conroy T, Hammerlid E, et al. Clinical and psychometric validation of an EORTC questionnaire module, the EORTC QLQ-OES18, to assess quality of life in patients with oesophageal cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39(10):1384–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful for all the help or support given to us.

Conflict of interest

The authors declared that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standard

All procedures in the study were performed in accordance with ethical standards of our institutional according to ethical standard of Declaration of Helsinki 1964. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Author information

Author notes

    Authors and Affiliations

    1. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China

      Min Zhang, Qiang Li, Hong-Tao Tie, Ying-Jiu Jiang & Qing-Chen Wu

    Authors
    1. Min Zhang
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    2. Qiang Li
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    3. Hong-Tao Tie
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    4. Ying-Jiu Jiang
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    5. Qing-Chen Wu
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding author

    Correspondence to Qing-Chen Wu.

    Additional information

    Min Zhang and Qiang Li have equally contributed to this work

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    About this article

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this article

    Zhang, M., Li, Q., Tie, HT. et al. Methods of reconstruction after esophagectomy on long-term health-related quality of life: a prospective, randomized study of 5-year follow-up. Med Oncol 32, 122 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-015-0568-0

    Download citation

    • Received:

    • Accepted:

    • Published:

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-015-0568-0

    Keywords

    Search

    Navigation