Anastomotic techniques for oesophagectomy for malignancy: systematic review and network meta-analysis

37Citations
Citations of this article
40Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Current evidence on the benefits of different anastomotic techniques (hand-sewn (HS), circular stapled (CS), triangulating stapled (TS) or linear stapled/semimechanical (LSSM) techniques) after oesophagectomy is conflicting. The aim of this study was to evaluate the evidence for the techniques for oesophagogastric anastomosis and their impact on perioperative outcomes. Methods: This was a systematic review and network meta-analysis. PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically for randomized and non-randomized studies reporting techniques for the oesophagogastric anastomosis. Network meta-analysis of postoperative anastomotic leaks and strictures was performed. Results: Of 4192 articles screened, 15 randomized and 22 non-randomized studies comprising 8618 patients were included. LSSM (odds ratio (OR) 0·50, 95 per cent c.i. 0·33 to 0·74; P = 0·001) and CS (OR 0·68, 0·48 to 0·95; P = 0·027) anastomoses were associated with lower anastomotic leak rates than HS anastomoses. LSSM anastomoses were associated with lower stricture rates than HS anastomoses (OR 0·32, 0·19 to 0·54; P < 0·001). Conclusion: LSSM anastomoses after oesophagectomy are superior with regard to anastomotic leak and stricture rates.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kamarajah, S. K., Bundred, J. R., Singh, P., Pasquali, S., & Griffiths, E. A. (2020, August 1). Anastomotic techniques for oesophagectomy for malignancy: systematic review and network meta-analysis. BJS Open. John Wiley and Sons Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50298

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free