EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF LARGE GASTRIC CONDUIT RECONSTRUCTION FOR ESOPHAGEAL REPLACEMENT IN THE TREATMENT OF ESOPHAGEAL CANCER

Nguyễn Văn Tiệp1, , Gia Khanh Ngo1, Trong Hoe Nguyen1, Thanh Son Le1, Thanh Bac Nguyen2, Ba Tung Nguyen3, Anh Tuan Nguyen4
1 Bộ môn - Trung tâm Phẫu thuật Tiêu hóa, Bệnh viện Quân y 103, Học viện Quân y
2 Bệnh viện Quân y 103, Học viện Quân y
3 Học viện Quân y
4 Khoa Ống tiêu hóa, Bệnh viện Trung ương Quân đội 108

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate certain technical characteristics of large gastric conduit reconstruction for esophageal replacement in the treatment of esophageal cancer. Methods: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted on 90 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy with large gastric conduit reconstruction at Military Hospital 103 and 108 Central Military Hospital from January 2021 to July 2025. Results: The large gastric conduit had a mean width of 5.1 ± 0.2cm and a mean length of 31.9 ± 1.8cm. Conduit width was normally from 5 - 5.5cm (73.4%), and conduit length was 30 - 33cm (nearly 80%). Totally laparoscopic gastric conduit reconstruction accounted for 25.6%, laparoscopic-assisted procedures accounted for 65.6%, and open surgery accounted for 8.8%. Gastric conduit formation using open stapler and laparoscopic stapler techniques were 74.4% and 25.6%, respectively. No technical complications related to gastric conduit formation were observed. Respiratory complications occurred in 16.7%, anastomotic leak in 5.6%, chylothorax in 3.3%, and mortality in 2.2%. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 13.5 ± 7.8 days. Anastomotic leakage was significantly more common in patients with conduit width < 5 cm compared to those with width ≥ 5cm (p = 0.02). Conclusion: Thoracoscopic esophagectomy with large gastric conduit reconstruction is feasible, safe, and associated with a low anastomotic leak rate. 

Article Details

References

1. Haverkamp L, Seesing MF, Ruurda JP, et al. Worldwide trends in surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer Dis Esophagus. 2017; 30(1):1-7.
2. Sun S, Wang Z, Huang C, et al. Different gastric tubes in esophageal reconstruction during esophagectomy. Esophagus. 2023; 20(4):595-604.
3. Sasaki K, Tsuruda Y, Shimonosono M, et al. Comparison of the subtotal and narrow gastric conduit for cervical esophagogastrostomy after esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients: A propensity score-matched analysis. Esophagus. 2024; 21(1):41-50.
4. Ndoye JM, Dia A, Ndiaye A, et al. Arteriography of three models of gastric oesophagoplasty: The whole stomach, a wide gastric tube and a narrow gastric tube. Surg Radiol Anat. 2006; 28(5): 429-437.
5. Ishikawa Y, Chang AC, Lin J, et al. Wider gastric conduit morphology is associated with improved blood flow during esophagectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2023; 27(5):845-854.
6. Koyanagi K, Ozawa S, Oguma J, et al. Blood flow speed of the gastric conduit assessed by indocyanine green fluorescence: New predictive evaluation of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016; 95(30):4386.
7. Nakajima Y, Kawada K, Tokairin Y, et al. Flexible gastric tube: A novel gastric tube formation method to prevent anastomotic leakage. Ann Thorac Surg. 2020; 109(6):445-447.
8. Liebermann-Meffert DM, Meier R, and Siewert JR. Vascular anatomy of the gastric tube used for esophageal reconstruction. Ann Thorac Surg. 1992; 54(6):1110-1115.
9. Collard JM, Tinton N, Malaise J, et al. Esophageal replacement: Gastric tube or whole stomach? Ann Thorac Surg. 1995; 60(2): 261-6; discussion 267.