Skip to main content

Surgery: Esophageal Reconstruction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
  • 446 Accesses

Abstract

Esophageal substitutes and reconstruction routes should be considered depending on the location and the extent of the tumor.

Subtotal esophagectomy and esophageal reconstruction with cervical or high intrathoracic anastomosis are generally performed for thoracic esophageal cancer. In Japan, the stomach, colon, and jejunum are used at rates of 86%, 3%, and 6%, respectively, as esophageal substitutes. Esophagogastric anastomotic techniques can largely be classified into hand sewn, circular stapler, and linear stapler techniques.

If the stomach cannot be used, the colon or jejunum with a vascular pedicle is selected as an esophageal substitute. The middle colic artery or ascending branch of the left colic artery is utilized as a vascular pedicle in use of the right or left colon, respectively. In case of a long segment of jejunal flap that cannot reach the neck, vascular anastomosis for supercharge and superdrainage is required to ensure blood supply to the tip of the flap.

Subcutaneous, anterior mediastinal, posterior mediastinal, and intrathoracic reconstruction routes are used, with posterior mediastinal (including intrathoracic) and anterior mediastinal routes preferably selected in Japan at rates of 49% and 38%, respectively.

Free jejunal transfer is selected for reconstruction in cases of cervical esophageal cancer limited to the cervical esophagus. If the cancer extends to the thoracic portion or another tumor is present in the thoracic esophagus, esophageal reconstruction using the stomach or colon is generally performed after transhiatal esophagectomy.

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

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, et al. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379:1887–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mariette C, Markar SR, et al. Hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Engl J Med. 2019;380(2):152–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. van der Sluis PC, van der Horst S, et al. Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy versus open transthoracic esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2019;269(4):621–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tachimori Y, Ozawa S, et al. Comprehensive registry of esophageal cancer in Japan, 2012. Esophagus. 2019;16:221–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Takeuchi H, Miyata H, et al. A risk model for esophagectomy using data of 5354 patients included in a Japanese nationwide web-based database. Ann Surg. 2014;260:259–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Japan Esophageal Society. Japanese classification of esophageal cancer, 11th edition: part I. Esophagus. 2017;14:1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Orringer MB, Sloan H. Esophageal replacement after blunt esophagectomy. In: Nyhus LM, Baker RJ, editors. Mastery of surgery, vol. 1. Boston: Little Brown; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Akiyama H. Esophageal anastomosis. Arch Surg. 1973;107:512–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ellis FH Jr, et al. A safe, widely applicable, and expeditious form of palliation for patients with the esophagus and cardia. Ann Surg. 1983;198(4):531–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mathisen DJ, Grillo HC, et al. Transthoracic esophagectomy: a safe approach to carcinoma of 210 the esophagus. Ann Thorac Surg. 1988;45:137–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Collard JM, Romagnoli R, et al. Terminalized semimechanical side-to-side suture technique for cervical esophagogastrostomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 1998;65:814–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ercan S, Rice TW, et al. Does esophagogastric anastomotic technique influence the outcome of patients with esophageal cancer? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;129:623–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Price TN, Nichols FC, et al. A comprehensive review of anastomotic technique in 432 esophagectomies. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013;95:1154–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Orringer MB, Marshall B, Iannettoni MD. Eliminating the cervical esophagogastric anastomotic leak with a side-to-side stapled anastomosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2000;119:277–88.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Singh D, Maley RH, et al. Experience and technique of stapled mechanical cervical esophagogastric anastomosis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;71:419–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Furukawa Y, Hanyu N, et al. Usefulness of automatic triangular anastomosis for esophageal cancer surgery using a linear stapler (TA-30). Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;11:80–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Noshiro H, Urata M. Triangulating stapling technique for esophagogastrostomy after minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surgery. 2013;154(3):604–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Takemura M, Yoshida K, Fujiwara Y. Modified triangulating stapling technique for esophagogastrostomy after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1249–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Toh Y, Sakaguchi Y, et al. The triangulating stapling technique for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy. Surg Today. 2009;39:201–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Valverde A, Hay JM, et al. Manual versus mechanical esophagogastric anastomosis after resection for carcinoma: a controlled trial. Surgery. 1996;120(3):476–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Law S, Fok M, et al. Comparison of hand-sewn and stapled esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal resection for cancer: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 1997;226(2):169–73.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Hsu HH, Chen JS, Huang PM, et al. Comparison of manual and mechanical cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal resection for squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2004;25(6):1097–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Saluja SS, Ray S, et al. Randomized trial comparing side-to-side stapled and hand-sewn esophagogastric anastomosis in neck. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(7):1287–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Wang WP, Gao Q, et al. A prospective randomized controlled trial of semi-mechanical versus hand-sewn or circular stapled esophagogastrostomy for prevention of anastomotic stricture. World J Surg. 2013;37(5):1043–50.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Hayata K, Nakamori M, et al. Circular stapling versus triangulating stapling for the cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Surgery. 2017;162(1):131–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Huang C, Xu X, Zhuang B, et al. A comparison of cervical delta-shaped anastomosis and circular stapled anastomosis after esophagectomy. World J Surg Oncol. 2017;15(1):31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Sugimura K, Miyata H, et al. Comparison of the modified Collard and hand-sewn anastomosis for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients: a propensity score-matched analysis. Ann Gastroenterol Surg. 2019;3(1):104–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Honda M, Kuriyama A, et al. Hand-sewn versus mechanical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2013;257(2):238–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ascioti AJ, Hofstetter WL, et al. Long-segment, supercharged, pedicled jejunal flap for total esophageal reconstruction. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;130:1391–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sato M, Ando N, Harada H, et al. Vascular pedicled jejunal Roux-en-Y reconstruction with supercharge technique for necrosis of the gastric tube following subtotal esophagectomy. Esophagus. 2007;4:87–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sato, M. (2020). Surgery: Esophageal Reconstruction. In: Ando, N. (eds) Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4190-2_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4190-2_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-15-4189-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-15-4190-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics