We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
Which Anastomotic Techniques Is the Best Choice for Cervical Esophagogastric Anastomosis in Esophagectomy? A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2023 Februrary
INTRODUCTION: The optimal choice of anastomotic techniques for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis in esophagectomy remains unclear.
METHODS: An electronic literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (data up to April 2022) was conducted and screened to compare hand sewn (HS), circular stapling (CS), side-to-side linear stapling (LS), and triangulating stapling (TS) for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis. Anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, anastomotic stricture, and reflux esophagitis of the 4 anastomotic techniques were evaluated using a Bayesian network meta-analysis by R.
RESULT: Twenty-nine studies were ultimately included, with a total of 5,020 patients from 9 randomized controlled trials, 7 prospect cohort studies, and 13 retrospective case-control studies in the meta-analysis. The present study demonstrates that the incidence of anastomotic leakage is lower in TS than HS and CS (TS vs. HS: odds ratio (OR) = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.1 to 0.9; TS vs. CS: OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.13 to 1.0), and the incidence of anastomotic stricture is lower in TS than in HS and CS (TS vs. HS: OR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.86; TS vs. CS: OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.58). TS ranks best in terms of anastomotic leakage, pulmonary complication, anastomotic stricture, and reflux esophagitis.
CONCLUSION: TS for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis of esophagectomy had a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage and stricture. TS should be preferentially recommended. Large-scale RCTs will be needed to provide more evidence in future studies.
METHODS: An electronic literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (data up to April 2022) was conducted and screened to compare hand sewn (HS), circular stapling (CS), side-to-side linear stapling (LS), and triangulating stapling (TS) for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis. Anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, anastomotic stricture, and reflux esophagitis of the 4 anastomotic techniques were evaluated using a Bayesian network meta-analysis by R.
RESULT: Twenty-nine studies were ultimately included, with a total of 5,020 patients from 9 randomized controlled trials, 7 prospect cohort studies, and 13 retrospective case-control studies in the meta-analysis. The present study demonstrates that the incidence of anastomotic leakage is lower in TS than HS and CS (TS vs. HS: odds ratio (OR) = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.1 to 0.9; TS vs. CS: OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.13 to 1.0), and the incidence of anastomotic stricture is lower in TS than in HS and CS (TS vs. HS: OR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.86; TS vs. CS: OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.58). TS ranks best in terms of anastomotic leakage, pulmonary complication, anastomotic stricture, and reflux esophagitis.
CONCLUSION: TS for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis of esophagectomy had a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage and stricture. TS should be preferentially recommended. Large-scale RCTs will be needed to provide more evidence in future studies.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app