We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Outcomes of esophageal bypass surgery and self-expanding metallic stent insertion in esophageal cancer: reevaluation of bypass surgery as an alternative treatment.
- Authors
Nomoto, Daichi; Baba, Yoshifumi; Akiyama, Takahiko; Okadome, Kazuo; Uchihara, Tomoyuki; Harada, Kazuto; Eto, Kojiro; Hiyoshi, Yukiharu; Nagai, Yohei; Ishimoto, Takatsugu; Iwatsuki, Masaaki; Iwagami, Shiro; Miyamoto, Yuji; Yoshida, Naoya; Watanabe, Masayuki; Baba, Hideo
- Abstract
Purpose: Advanced esophageal cancer often results in esophageal stenosis or tracheoesophageal fistula. Esophageal bypass surgery and esophageal stent insertion are palliative treatments for esophageal cancer. With improvements in metallic stents and the stent insertion technique, esophageal stent insertion appears to be performed more frequently than bypass surgery, worldwide. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of bypass surgery and stent insertion in our hospital and reevaluate which patients would benefit from bypass surgery. Methods: A total of 70 esophageal cancer patients who could not tolerate oral feeding due to esophageal stenosis or tracheoesophageal fistula underwent palliative treatment [esophageal bypass surgery (N = 34) and esophageal stent insertion (N = 36)] at Kumamoto University. We retrospectively investigated the clinicopathological factors, postoperative outcomes, and complications. Results: Both treatments could significantly improve the amount of food intake and the dietary form (P < 0.01). The length of hospital stay was shorter (P < 0.01) and complications associated with treatment were reduced in the stent group (P = 0.03). The overall survival did not differ significantly between the groups (log rank P = 0.22). Importantly, in the bypass surgery group, the patients who received postoperative treatment had a better prognosis than those who did not receive postoperative treatment (log rank P < 0.01). Conclusion: Both bypass surgery and stent insertion allowed oral intake in patients who could not tolerate oral feeding because of esophageal stenosis or tracheoesophageal fistula. Considering that patients who undergo stent insertion have a shorter hospital stay and fewer complications, stent insertion may be a better first choice for treatment than bypass surgery. However, bypass surgery may be an option for patients who can tolerate postoperative treatment.
- Subjects
ESOPHAGEAL cancer; ESOPHAGEAL stenosis; TRACHEAL fistula; LENGTH of stay in hospitals; SURGICAL stents
- Publication
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery, 2020, Vol 405, Issue 8, p1111
- ISSN
1435-2443
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1007/s00423-020-01969-x