Interventions to prevent anastomotic leak after esophageal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

8Citations
Citations of this article
44Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a common and serious complication following esophagectomy. We aimed to provide an up-to-date review and critical appraisal of the efficacy and safety of all previous interventions aiming to reduce AL risk. Methods: We searched MEDLINE and Embase from 1946 to January 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions to minimize esophagogastric AL. Pooled risk ratios (RR) for AL were obtained using a random effects model. Results: Two reviewers screened 441 abstracts and identified 17 RCTs eligible for inclusion; 11 studies were meta-analyzed. Omentoplasty significantly reduced the risk of AL by 78% [RR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.10, 0.50] compared to conventional anastomosis (3 studies, n = 611 patients). Early removal of NG tube significantly reduced the risk of AL by 62% [RR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.65] compared to prolonged NG tube removal (2 studies, n = 293 patients); Stapled anastomosis did not significantly reduce the risk of AL [RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.45, 1.87] compared to hand-sewn anastomosis (6 studies, n = 1454 patients). The quality of evidence was high for omentoplasty (vs. conventional anastomosis), moderate for early NG tube removal (vs. prolonged NG tube removal), and very low for stapled anastomosis (vs. hand-sewn anastomosis). Conclusions: This is the first meta-analysis to summarize the graded quality of evidence for all RCT interventions designed to reduce the risk of AL following esophagectomy. Our findings demonstrated that omentoplasty significantly reduced the risk of AL with a high quality of evidence. Although early NG tube removal significantly reduced AL risk, there is a need for further research to strengthen the quality of evidence for this finding. Evidence profiles presented in our review may help inform the development of future clinical practice recommendations. Systematic review registration: CRD42019127181.

References Powered by Scopus

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement

22827Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations

15295Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Randomised controlled trials – the gold standard for effectiveness research: Study design: randomised controlled trials

925Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Pre-emptive active drainage of reflux (PARD) in Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy with negative pressure and simultaneous enteral nutrition using a double-lumen open-pore film drain (dOFD)

16Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Improved anastomotic leakage rates after the “flap and wrap” reconstruction in Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for cancer

6Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Prospective Evaluation of a Universally Applied Laparoscopic Gastric Ischemic Preconditioning Protocol Prior to Esophagectomy with Comparison with Historical Controls

4Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Grigor, E. J. M., Kaaki, S., Fergusson, D. A., Maziak, D. E., & Seely, A. J. E. (2021). Interventions to prevent anastomotic leak after esophageal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Surgery, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-020-01026-w

Readers over time

‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2508162432

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 6

40%

Researcher 5

33%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

20%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

7%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 15

83%

Nursing and Health Professions 2

11%

Social Sciences 1

6%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0