Abstract
Background
Postoperative anastomotic leakage is a severe complication after gastric tube reconstruction during esophagectomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of postoperative endoscopic assessment of anastomosis and its correlation with intraoperative indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence assessment of the gastric tube.
Methods
We retrospectively reviewed 72 consecutive patients who underwent gastric tube reconstruction using the ICG fluorescence method during esophagectomy. Forty-six patients underwent the ICG line-marking method (LMM group; ICG before gastric tube creation). The other 26 underwent the conventional procedure and comprised the control group (ICG after gastric tube creation). Postoperative endoscopic assessment (PEA) of anastomosis was performed 7 days after surgery and results were classified as follows: grade 1 (normal or partial white coat), grade 2 (ulcer comprising less than half the circumference), and grade 3 (ulcer comprising more than half the circumference).
Results
Anastomotic leakage occurred in 7 of 72 patients (9.7%). The incidence of anastomotic leakage in the LMM group was tended to be lower than those in the control group (6.5% vs. 15.4%; P = 0.244). Of the 40 patients who underwent PEA, 3 (7.5%) had leakage. PEA grading was significantly associated with anastomotic leakage (P < 0.001). Better intraoperative ICG assessment was significantly associated with better endoscopic assessment grade (P = 0.041).
Conclusion
Intraoperative ICG assessment of the gastric tube was associated with PEA grading on anastomosis during esophagectomy.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Nozaki I, Kato K, Igaki H, Ito Y, Daiko H, Yano M, Udagawa H, Mizusawa J, Katayama H, Nakamura K, Kitagawa Y (2015) Evaluation of safety profile of thoracoscopic esophagectomy for T1bN0M0 cancer using data from JCOG0502: a prospective multicenter study. Surg Endosc 29:3519–3526
Takeuchi H, Miyata H, Gotoh M, Kitagawa Y, Baba H, Kimura W, Tomita N, Nakagoe T, Shimada M, Sugihara K, Mori M (2014) A risk model for esophagectomy using data of 5354 patients included in a Japanese nationwide web-based database. Ann Surg 260:259–266
Goense L, van Dijk WA, Govaert JA, van Rossum PS, Ruurda JP, van Hillegersberg R (2017) Hospital costs of complications after esophagectomy for cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 43:696–702
Nederlof N, de Jonge J, de Vringer T, Tran TC, Spaander MC, Tilanus HW, Wijnhoven BP (2017) Does routine endoscopy or contrast swallow study after esophagectomy and gastric tube reconstruction change patient management? J Gastrointest Surg 21:251–258
Okada T, Kawada K, Nakajima Y, Tokairin Y, Nagai K, Kawano T (2013) Internal pressure of the conduit during endoscopy on the day after esophagectomy. Dig Surg 30:183–189
Maish M, DeMeesters S, Choustoulakis E, Briel JW, Hagen JA, Peters JH, Lipham JC, Bremner CG, DeMeester TR (2005) The safety and usefulness of endoscopy for evaluation of the graft and anastomosis early after esophagectomy and reconstruction. Surg Endosc 19:1093–1102
Kitagawa H, Namikawa T, Munekage M, Akimori T, Kobayashi M, Hanazaki K (2015) Visualization of the stomach’s arterial networks during esophageal surgery using the HyperEye Medical System. Anticancer Res 35:6201–6205
Namikawa T, Sato T, Hanazaki K (2015) Recent advances in near-infrared fluorescence-guided imaging surgery using indocyanine green. Surg Today 45:1467–1474
Namikawa T, Uemura S, Kondo N, Yamamoto M, Maeda H, Nishimori H, Sato T, Orihashi K, Kobayashi M, Hanazaki K (2014) Successful preservation of the mesenteric and bowel circulation with treatment for a ruptured superior mesenteric artery aneurysm using the HyperEye Medical System. Am Surg 80:E359–E361
Juloori A, Tucker SL, Komaki R, Liao Z, Correa AM, Swisher SG, Hofstetter WL, Lin SH (2014) Influence of preoperative radiation field on postoperative leak rates in esophageal cancer patients after trimodality therapy. J Thorac Oncol 9:534–540
Okamura A, Watanabe M, Imamura Y, Kamiya S, Yamashita K, Kurogochi T, Mine S (2017) Preoperative glycosylated hemoglobin levels predict anastomotic leak after esophagectomy with cervical esophagogastric anastomosis. World J Surg 41:200–207
Goense L, van Rossum PS, Weijs TJ, van Det MJ, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, Luyer MD, van Leeuwen MS, van Hillegersberg R, Ruurda JP, Kouwenhoven EA (2016) Aortic calcification increases the risk of anastomotic leakage after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 102:247–252
Sauvanet A, Baltar J, Le Mee J, Belghiti J (1998) Diagnosis and conservative management of intrathoracic leakage after oesophagectomy. Br J Surg 85:1446–1449
Schaible A, Sauer P, Hartwig W, Hackert T, Hinz U, Radeleff B, Büchler MW, Werner J (2014) Radiologic versus endoscopic evaluation of the conduit after esophageal resection: a prospective, blinded, intraindividually controlled diagnostic study. Surg Endosc 28:2078–2085
Fujiwara H, Nakajima Y, Kawada K, Tokairin Y, Miyawaki Y, Okada T, Nagai K, Kawano T (2016) Endoscopic assessment 1 day after esophagectomy for predicting cervical esophagogastric anastomosis-relating complications. Surg Endosc 30:1564–1571
Koyanagi K, Ozawa S, Oguma J, Kazuno A, Yamazaki Y, Ninomiya Y, Ochiai H, Tachimori Y (2016) Blood flow speed of the gastric conduit assessed by indocyanine green fluorescence: new predictive evaluation of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy. Medicine (Baltimore) 95:e4386
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Disclosures
Drs. Hiroyuki Kitagawa, Tsutomu Namikawa, Jun Iwabu, Kazune Fujisawa, Sunao Uemura, Sachi Tsuda, and Kazuhiro Hanazaki have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kitagawa, H., Namikawa, T., Iwabu, J. et al. Assessment of the blood supply using the indocyanine green fluorescence method and postoperative endoscopic evaluation of anastomosis of the gastric tube during esophagectomy. Surg Endosc 32, 1749–1754 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5857-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5857-6