Journal of Chest Surgery

The Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (대한심장혈관흉부외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Role of Barium Swallow in Diagnosing Clinically Significant Anastomotic Leak following Esophagectomy

  • Roh, Simon (Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics) ;
  • Iannettoni, Mark D. (Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University) ;
  • Keech, John C. (Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics) ;
  • Bashir, Mohammad (Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics) ;
  • Gruber, Peter J. (Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics) ;
  • Parekh, Kalpaj R. (Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics)
  • Received : 2015.09.24
  • Accepted : 2016.01.18
  • Published : 2016.04.05
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: Barium swallow is performed following esophagectomy to evaluate the anastomosis for detection of leaks and to assess the emptying of the gastric conduit. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the barium swallow study in diagnosing anastomotic leaks following esophagectomy. Methods: Patients who underwent esophagectomy from January 2000 to December 2013 at our institution were investigated. Barium swallow was routinely done between days 5-7 to detect a leak. These results were compared to clinically determined leaks (defined by neck wound infection requiring jejunal feeds and or parenteral nutrition) during the postoperative period. The sensitivity and specificity of barium swallow in diagnosing clinically significant anastomotic leaks was determined. Results: A total of 395 esophagectomies were performed (mean age, 62.2 years). The indications for the esophagectomy were as follows: malignancy (n=320), high-grade dysplasia (n=14), perforation (n=27), benign stricture (n=7), achalasia (n=16), and other (n=11). A variety of techniques were used including transhiatal (n=351), McKeown (n=35), and Ivor Lewis (n=9) esophagectomies. Operative mortality was 2.8% (n=11). Three hundred and sixty-eight patients (93%) underwent barium swallow study after esophagectomy. Clinically significant anastomotic leak was identified in 36 patients (9.8%). Barium swallow was able to detect only 13/36 clinically significant leaks. The sensitivity of the swallow in diagnosing a leak was 36% and specificity was 97%. The positive and negative predictive values of barium swallow study in detecting leaks were 59% and 93%, respectively. Conclusion: Barium swallow is an insensitive but specific test for detecting leaks at the cervical anastomotic site after esophagectomy.

Keywords

References

  1. Parekh K, Iannettoni MD. Complications of esophageal resection and reconstruction. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2007;19:79-88. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semtcvs.2006.11.002
  2. Cooke DT, Lin GC, Lau CL, et al. Analysis of cervical esophagogastric anastomotic leaks after transhiatal esophagectomy: risk factors, presentation, and detection. Ann Thorac Surg 2009;88:177-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.03.035
  3. Orringer MB, Marshall B, Chang AC, Lee J, Pickens A, Lau CL. Two thousand transhiatal esophagectomies: changing trends, lessons learned. Ann Surg 2007;246:363-72. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31814697f2
  4. Bhayani NH, Gupta A, Dunst CM, Kurian AA, Reavis KM, Swanstrom LL. Esophagectomies with thoracic incisions carry increased pulmonary morbidity. JAMA Surg 2013;148:733-8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2013.2356
  5. Tirnaksiz MB, Deschamps C, Allen MS, Johnson DC, Pairolero PC. Effectiveness of screening aqueous contrast swallow in detecting clinically significant anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy. Eur Surg Res 2005;37:123-8. https://doi.org/10.1159/000084544
  6. Tomaszek SC, Cassivi SD, Allen MS, et al. An alternative postoperative pathway reduces length of hospitalization following oesophagectomy. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2010;37:807-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcts.2009.09.034
  7. Agha FP, Orringer MB, Amendola MA. Gastric interposition following transhiatal esophagectomy: radiographic evaluation. Gastrointest Radiol 1985;10:17-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01893064
  8. Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, et al. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2012;379:1887-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60516-9
  9. Butler N, Collins S, Memon B, Memon MA. Minimally invasive oesophagectomy: current status and future direction. Surg Endosc 2011;25:2071-83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1511-2
  10. Decker G, Coosemans W, De Leyn P, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2009;35:13-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcts.2008.09.024
  11. Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Franchetti Y, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: results of a prospective phase II multicenter trial-the eastern cooperative oncology group (E2202) study. Ann Surg 2015;261:702-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000993
  12. Urschel JD. Esophagogastrostomy anastomotic leaks complicating esophagectomy: a review. Am J Surg 1995;169:634-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9610(99)80238-4
  13. Hulscher JB, Tijssen JG, Obertop H, van Lanschot JJ. Transthoracic versus transhiatal resection for carcinoma of the esophagus: a meta-analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 2001;72:306-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(00)02570-4
  14. Lin J, Iannettoni MD. Transhiatal esophagectomy. Surg Clin North Am 2005;85:593-610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2005.01.009
  15. Barreto JC, Posner MC. Transhiatal versus transthoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 2010;16:3804-10. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v16.i30.3804
  16. Hulscher JB, van Sandick JW, de Boer AG, et al. Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1662-9. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa022343
  17. Khullar OV, Jiang R, Force SD, et al. Transthoracic versus transhiatal resection for esophageal adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus: a value-based comparison. J Surg Oncol 2015;112:517-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.24024
  18. Markar SR, Arya S, Karthikesalingam A, Hanna GB. Technical factors that affect anastomotic integrity following esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2013;20:4274-81. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3189-x
  19. Boone J, Rinkes IB, van Leeuwen M, van Hillegersberg R. Diagnostic value of routine aqueous contrast swallow examination after oesophagectomy for detecting leakage of the cervical oesophagogastric anastomosis. ANZ J Surg 2008;78:784-90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.2008.04650.x
  20. Griffin SM, Lamb PJ, Dresner SM, Richardson DL, Hayes N. Diagnosis and management of a mediastinal leak following radical oesophagectomy. Br J Surg 2001;88:1346-51. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0007-1323.2001.01918.x
  21. Solomon DG, Sasaki CT, Salem RR. An evaluation of the routine use of contrast radiography as a screening test for cervical anastomotic integrity after esophagectomy. Am J Surg 2012;203:467-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.04.005
  22. Buecker A, Wein BB, Neuerburg JM, Guenther RW. Esophageal perforation: comparison of use of aqueous and barium-containing contrast media. Radiology 1997;202:683-6. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.202.3.9051016
  23. Gollub MJ, Bains MS. Barium sulfate: a new (old) contrast agent for diagnosis of postoperative esophageal leaks. Radiology 1997;202:360-2. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.202.2.9015057
  24. Swanson JO, Levine MS, Redfern RO, Rubesin SE. Usefulness of high-density barium for detection of leaks after esophagogastrectomy, total gastrectomy, and total laryngectomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:415-20. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.181.2.1810415
  25. Hogan BA, Winter DC, Broe D, Broe P, Lee MJ. Prospective trial comparing contrast swallow, computed tomography and endoscopy to identify anastomotic leak following oesophagogastric surgery. Surg Endosc 2008;22:767-71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9629-6
  26. Lantos JE, Levine MS, Rubesin SE, Lau CT, Torigian DA. Comparison between esophagography and chest computed tomography for evaluation of leaks after esophagectomy and gastric pull-through. J Thorac Imaging 2013;28:121-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/RTI.0b013e31826ff062
  27. Schaible A, Sauer P, Hartwig W, et al. Radiologic versus endoscopic evaluation of the conduit after esophageal resection: a prospective, blinded, intraindividually controlled diagnostic study. Surg Endosc 2014;28:2078-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3435-8
  28. Strauss C, Mal F, Perniceni T, et al. Computed tomography versus water-soluble contrast swallow in the detection of intrathoracic anastomotic leak complicating esophagogastrectomy (Ivor Lewis): a prospective study in 97 patients. Ann Surg 2010;251:647-51. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181c1aeb8
  29. Tanomkiat W, Galassi W. Barium sulfate as contrast medium for evaluation of postoperative anastomotic leaks. Acta Radiol 2000;41:482-5. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0455.2000.041005482.x
  30. Upponi S, Ganeshan A, D'Costa H, et al. Radiological detection of post-oesophagectomy anastomotic leak: a comparison between multidetector CT and fluoroscopy. Br J Radiol 2008;81:545-8. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/30515892
  31. Low DE, Alderson D, Cecconello I, et al. International consensus on standardization of data collection for complications associated with esophagectomy: Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG). Ann Surg 2015;262:286-94. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001098
  32. Iannettoni MD, Whyte RI, Orringer MB. Catastrophic complications of the cervical esophagogastric anastomosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995;110:1493-500. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5223(95)70072-2
  33. Aminian A, Panahi N, Mirsharifi R, et al. Predictors and outcome of cervical anastomotic leakage after esophageal cancer surgery. J Cancer Res Ther 2011;7:448-53. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-1482.92016
  34. Kassis ES, Kosinski AS, Ross P Jr, Koppes KE, Donahue JM, Daniel VC. Predictors of anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: an analysis of the society of thoracic surgeons general thoracic database. Ann Thorac Surg 2013;96:1919-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.07.119
  35. Bolton JS, Conway WC, Abbas AE. Planned delay of oral intake after esophagectomy reduces the cervical anastomotic leak rate and hospital length of stay. J Gastrointest Surg 2014;18:304-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-013-2322-2
  36. Weijs TJ, Berkelmans GH, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, et al. Routes for early enteral nutrition after esophagectomy: a systematic review. Clin Nutr 2015;34:1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2014.07.011
  37. Page RD, Asmat A, McShane J, Russell GN, Pennefather SH. Routine endoscopy to detect anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 2013;95:292-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.09.048
  38. DeArmond DT, Carswell A, Louden CL, et al. Diagnosis of anastomotic leak: electrolyte detection versus barium fluoroscopy. J Surg Res 2013;182:192-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2012.10.025
  39. Ellebæk M, Qvist N, Fristrup C, Mortensen MB. Mediastinal microdialysis in the diagnosis of early anastomotic leakage after resection for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. Am J Surg 2014;208:397-405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.09.026
  40. Perry Y, Towe CW, Kwong J, Ho VP, Linden PA. Serial drain amylase can accurately detect anastomotic leak after esophagectomy and may facilitate early discharge. Ann Thorac Surg 2015;100:2041-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.05.092
  41. Servais EL, Rizk NP, Oliveira L, Rusch VW, Bikson M, Adusumilli PS. Real-time intraoperative detection of tissue hypoxia in gastrointestinal surgery by wireless pulse oximetry. Surg Endosc 2011;25:1383-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1372-8

Cited by

  1. Logistic regression analysis of the risk factors of anastomotic fistula after radical resection of esophageal‐cardiac cancer vol.8, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.12509
  2. Airway Compromise due to Retropharyngeal Emphysema-A Rare Complication of an Extravasated Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheter vol.2019, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6980475
  3. Diagnosing anastomotic leak post-esophagectomy: a systematic review vol.34, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doaa076