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

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 techn...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: S. K. Kamarajah, J. R. Bundred, P. Singh, S. Pasquali, E. A. Griffiths
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Oxford University Press 2020-08-01
Series:BJS Open
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50298
id doaj-d4da49ed4bfa4d77b425dbb2f80163c5
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d4da49ed4bfa4d77b425dbb2f80163c52021-04-02T11:42:42ZengOxford University PressBJS Open2474-98422020-08-014456357610.1002/bjs5.50298Anastomotic techniques for oesophagectomy for malignancy: systematic review and network meta‐analysisS. K. Kamarajah0J. R. Bundred1P. Singh2S. Pasquali3E. A. Griffiths4Department of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic and Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Newcastle upon Tyne UKCollege of Medical and Dental Sciences Birmingham UKDepartment of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust Birmingham UKDepartment of Surgery Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori Milan ItalyInstitute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences University of Birmingham Birmingham UKBackground 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.https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50298
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author S. K. Kamarajah
J. R. Bundred
P. Singh
S. Pasquali
E. A. Griffiths
spellingShingle S. K. Kamarajah
J. R. Bundred
P. Singh
S. Pasquali
E. A. Griffiths
Anastomotic techniques for oesophagectomy for malignancy: systematic review and network meta‐analysis
BJS Open
author_facet S. K. Kamarajah
J. R. Bundred
P. Singh
S. Pasquali
E. A. Griffiths
author_sort S. K. Kamarajah
title Anastomotic techniques for oesophagectomy for malignancy: systematic review and network meta‐analysis
title_short Anastomotic techniques for oesophagectomy for malignancy: systematic review and network meta‐analysis
title_full Anastomotic techniques for oesophagectomy for malignancy: systematic review and network meta‐analysis
title_fullStr Anastomotic techniques for oesophagectomy for malignancy: systematic review and network meta‐analysis
title_full_unstemmed Anastomotic techniques for oesophagectomy for malignancy: systematic review and network meta‐analysis
title_sort anastomotic techniques for oesophagectomy for malignancy: systematic review and network meta‐analysis
publisher Oxford University Press
series BJS Open
issn 2474-9842
publishDate 2020-08-01
description 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.
url https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50298
work_keys_str_mv AT skkamarajah anastomotictechniquesforoesophagectomyformalignancysystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT jrbundred anastomotictechniquesforoesophagectomyformalignancysystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT psingh anastomotictechniquesforoesophagectomyformalignancysystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT spasquali anastomotictechniquesforoesophagectomyformalignancysystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT eagriffiths anastomotictechniquesforoesophagectomyformalignancysystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
_version_ 1721571636326432768