Skip to main content
Log in

Risk Factors of Reflux Esophagitis in the Cervical Remnant Following Esophagectomy with Gastric Tube Reconstruction

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The risk factors and suitable treatment of reflux esophagitis (RE) of the cervical remnant in patients undergoing radical esophagectomy remain unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk factors in patients with RE in the cervical remnant.

Methods

We retrospectively examined 141 consecutive patients who underwent esophagectomy and reconstruction with gastric tubing. RE was diagnosed by upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and graded according to the Los Angeles Classification. Statistically, 11 potential risk factors of RE were evaluated. The postoperative follow-up time ranged from 18 to 204 months (median 60 months).

Results

Among a total of 141 patients, 48 (34%) had RE in the cervical remnant, with 14 (29%) cases categorized as grade B, nine (19%) as grade C, and 25 (52%) as grade D. The cumulative incidence of RE in the cervical remnant was 24% at 5 years after surgery and 60% at 10 years, respectively. Pyloroplasty and bile reflux were identified as independent risk factors of RE in the cervical remnant by univariate and multivariate analyses.

Conclusions

The results of this study show a high incidence and high grade of RE in the cervical remnant after esophagectomy. Routine endoscopic examination and suitable medication is required for the control of RE in the cervical remnant together with surgical procedures to avoid bile reflux.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ando N, Ozawa S, Kitagawa Y et al (2000) Improvement in the results of surgical treatment of advanced squamous esophageal carcinoma during 15 consecutive years. Ann Surg 232:225–235

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Law S, Kwong DL, Kwok KF et al (2003) Improvement in treatment results and long-term survival of patients with esophageal cancer: impact of chemoradiation and change in treatment strategy. Ann Surg 238:339–347

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Akiyama H, Tsurumaru M, Udagawa H et al (1994) Radical lymph node dissection for cancer of the thoracic esophagus. Ann Surg 220:364–373

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Skinner DB (1980) Esophageal reconstruction. Am J Surg 139:810–814

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gutshow C, Collard JM, Romagnoli R et al (2001) Denervated stomach as an esophageal substitute recovers intraluminal acidity with time. Ann Surg 223:509–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Okada N, Sakurai T, Tsuchihashi S et al (1986) Gastric function in patients with intrathoracic stomach after esophageal surgery. Ann Surg 204:114–121

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Yamamoto S, Makuuchi H, Shimada H et al (2007) Clinical analysis of reflux esophagitis following esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction. J Gastroenterol 42:342–345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Shibuya S, Fukudo S, Shineha R et al (2003) High incidence of reflux esophagitis observed by routine endoscopic examination after gastric pull-up esophagectomy. World J Surg 27:580–583

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Armstrong D, Bennett JR, Blum AL et al (1996) The endoscopic assessment esophagitis: a progress report on observer agreement. Gastroenterology 111:85–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Green FL, Page DL, Fleming ID et al (2002) American joint committee on cancer staging manual, 6th edn. Springer, New York, pp 91–95

    Google Scholar 

  11. Isono K, Sato H, Nakayama K (1991) Results of a nationwide study on the three-field lymph node dissection of esophageal cancer. Oncology 48:411–420

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Nishimaki T, Tanaka O, Suzuki T et al (1994) Clinical implications of cervical lymph node metastasis patterns in thoracic esophageal cancer. Ann Surg 220:775–781

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Demeester TR, Johansson KE, Frantze I et al (1988) Indications, surgical technique, and long-term functional results of colon interposition or bypass. Ann Surg 208:460–474

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Urschel JD, Blewett CJ, Young JE et al (2002) Pyloric drainage (pyloroplasty) or no drainage in gastric reconstruction after esophagectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Dig Surg 19:160–164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Romagnoli R, Bechi P, Salizzoni M et al (1999) Combined 24-hour intraluminal pH and bile monitoring of the denervated whole stomach as an esophageal substitute. Hepatogastroenterology 46:86–91

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Okuyama M, Motoyama S, Maruyama K et al (2008) Proton pump inhibitors relieve and prevent symptoms related to gastric acidity after esophagectomy. World J Surg 32:246–254

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shin-ichi Kosugi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yajima, K., Kosugi, Si., Kanda, T. et al. Risk Factors of Reflux Esophagitis in the Cervical Remnant Following Esophagectomy with Gastric Tube Reconstruction. World J Surg 33, 284–289 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-008-9856-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-008-9856-6

Keywords

Navigation