Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus
-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation versus fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease: systematic review and pooled analysis.
Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) has been proposed as a less invasive, more appealing alternative intervention to fundoplication for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes following MSA for GERD control in comparison with laparoscopic fundoplication. A systematic electronic search for articles was performed in Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for single-arm cohort studies or comparative studies (with fundoplication) evaluating the use of MSA. ⋯ In conclusion, magnetic sphincter augmentation achieves good GERD symptomatic control similar to that of fundoplication, with the benefit of less gas bloating. The safety of MSA also appears acceptable with only 3.3% of patients requiring device removal. There is an urgent need for randomized data directly comparing fundoplication with MSA for the treatment of GERD to truly evaluate the efficacy of this treatment approach.
-
Cancers of the esophagus and stomach are challenging to treat. With the advent of neoadjuvant therapies, patients frequently have a preoperative window with potential to optimize their status before major resectional surgery. It is unclear as to whether a prehabilitation or optimization program can affect surgical outcomes. ⋯ Postoperative rehabilitation was associated with improved clinical outcomes. There may be a role for prehabilitation among patients undergoing major resectional surgery in esophagogastric malignancy. A large randomized controlled trial is warranted to investigate this further.
-
The impact of preoperative sarcopenia on long-term survival of esophageal cancer patients after esophagectomy remains unclear. We conducted an updated meta-analysis focusing on current topic comprehensively. We systematically searched relevant studies investigating the impact of preoperative sarcopenia on survival of patients with surgically treated esophageal cancer in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science up to July 20, 2018. ⋯ Therefore, patients with sarcopenia had a significantly worse prognosis than those without after surgical resection of esophageal cancer. Preoperative sarcopenia is an independent unfavorable prognostic factor for esophageal cancer patients after esophagectomy. However, high-quality studies with appropriate adjustments for confounding factors are needed to confirm our conclusions.
-
Anastomotic leakage is one of the most severe complications after esophageal resection with gastric tube reconstruction. Impaired perfusion of the gastric fundus is seen as the main contributing factor for this complication. Optical modalities show potential in recognizing compromised perfusion in real time, when ischemia is still reversible. ⋯ Optical techniques aim to improve perfusion monitoring by real-time, high-resolution, and high-contrast measurements and could therefore be valuable in intraoperative perfusion mapping. LDF and LSCI use perfusion units, and are therefore subjective in interpretation. FI visualizes influx directly, but needs a quantitative parameter for interpretation during surgery.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Postoperative pain management after esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Effective pain management after esophagectomy is essential for patient comfort, early recovery, low surgical morbidity, and short hospitalization. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the best pain management modality focusing on the balance between benefits and risks. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library were systematically searched to identify all studies investigating different pain management modalities after esophagectomy in relation to primary outcomes (postoperative pain scores at 24 and 48 hours, technical failure, and opioid consumption), and secondary outcomes (pulmonary complications, nausea and vomiting, hypotension, urinary retention, and length of hospital stay). ⋯ Sample sizes were too small to draw inferences on opioid consumption, the risk of nausea and vomiting, hypotension, urinary retention, and length of hospital stay when comparing the different pain management modalities including systemic, epidural, intrathecal, intrapleural, and paravertebral analgesia. This systematic review and meta-analysis shows no differences in postoperative pain scores or pulmonary complications after esophagectomy between systemic and epidural analgesia, and between systemic and paravertebral analgesia. Further randomized controlled trails are warranted to determine the optimal pain management modality after esophagectomy.