Start your free 3-day trial — no credit card required, full access included

Evidence - Gastrointestinal anastomosis technique – Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy

  1. Literature summary

    Esophagojejunostomy (E-J) may be fashioned Roux-en-Y by hand or mechanically as a simple anastomosis or with pouch formation. There is no consensus as to which technique is preferable [1].

    The simple E-J may result in increased weight loss, reflux and dumping syndrome [2]. A pouch promotes better postoperative food intake and quality of life but is more frequently associated with reflux symptoms than the classical Roux-en-Y procedure. This requires adequate distance between the esophagus and the jejunojejunostomy [2].

    In long-term survivors the pouch procedure is functionally superior to simple Roux-en-Y reconstruction, since postgastrectomy symptoms are less severe and weight progression is more favorable [3]. When fashioning the pouch, the anastomosis should be completely subphrenic, i.e., within the abdominal cavity.

    In patients with poor overall prognosis, the end-to-side Roux-en-Y E-J should be favored as the technically simplest and fastest reconstruction and, due to its simplicity and safety, in these situations it is regarded as the standard technique [4].

    With failure rates around 1% the mechanical E-J is regarded as the gold standard [5]. It has similar results as the hand sewn anastomosis but is easier and faster to perform [6]. Staplers do not increase safety or reduce complication rates [5]; on the contrary, lack of practice may increase the complication rates, which in turn may be reduced by increased volume of this procedure [7].

    Cardiac tumors, splenectomy, long operating times and manual anastomosis may increase anastomotic failure. Pathogenic organisms have been demonstrated more often in anastomotic failure [8].

  2. Ongoing trials on this topic

  3. References on this topic

    1. Gabor S, Renner H, Matzi V et al (2005) Early enteral feeding compared with parenteral nutrition after oesophageal or oesophagogastric resection and reconstruction. Br J Nutr 93(4):509–513

    2. Law S, Suen DT, Wong KH et al (2005) A single-layer, continuous, hand-sewn method for esophageal anastomosis: prospective evaluation in 218 patients. Arch Surg 140(1):33–39

    3. Gabor S, Renner H, Matzi V et al (2005) Early enteral feeding compared with parenteral nutrition after oesophageal or oesophagogastric resection and reconstruction. Br J Nutr 93(4):509–513

    4. Blewett CJ, Miller JD, Young JE et al (2001) Anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a comparison of thoracic and cervical anastomoses. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 7(2):75–78

    5. Schoppmann SF, Prager G, Langer FB, Riegler FM, Kabon B, Fleischmann E, Zacherl J. Open versus minimally invasive esophagectomy: a single-center case controlled study. Surg Endosc. 2010 Dec; 24(12):3044-53.

    6. Ercan S, Rice TW, Murthy SC et al (2005) Does esophagogastric anastomotic technique influence the outcome of patients with esophageal cancer? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 129(3):623–631

    7. Jones WB, Myers KM, Traxler LB, Bour ES (2008) Clinical results using bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement for circular staplers. Am Surg 74(6):462–468

    8. Santos RS, Raftopoulos Y, Singh D et al (2004) Utility of total mechanical stapled cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy: a comparison to conventional anastomotic techniques. Surgery 136(4):917–925

  4. Reviews

    Hung PC, Chen HY, Tu YK, Kao YS. A Comparison of Different Types of Esophageal Reconstructions: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. J Clin Med. 2022  Aug 26;11(17).

    Honório FCC, Tustumi F, Pinheiro Filho JEL, Marques SSB, Glina FPA, Henriques AC, Dias AR, Waisberg J. Esophagojejunostomy after total gastrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing hand-sewn and stapled anastomosis. J Surg Oncol. 2022 Jul;126(1):161-167.

    Hong SM, Chen Q, Cao H, Hong JJ, Huang JX. Developing a new predictive index for  anastomotic leak following the anastomosis of esophageal atresia: preliminary results from a single centre. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2022 May 28;17(1):131.

    Schlottmann F, Angeramo CA, Bras Harriott C, Casas MA, Herbella FAM, Patti MG. Transthoracic Esophagectomy: Hand-sewn Versus Side-to-side Linear-stapled Versus  Circular-stapled Anastomosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2022 Jun 1;32(3):380-392.

    Bonavina L. Progress in the esophagogastric anastomosis and the challenges of minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgery. Ann Transl Med. 2021 May;9(10):907.

    Jiang H, Li Y, Wang T. Comparison of Billroth I, Billroth II, and Roux-en-Y reconstructions following distal gastrectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Cir Esp (Engl Ed). 2021 Jun-Jul;99(6):412-420.

    Herron R, Abbas G. Techniques of Esophageal Anastomoses for Esophagectomy. Surg Clin North Am. 2021 Jun;101(3):511-524.

    Barbaro A, Eldredge TA, Shenfine J. Diagnosing anastomotic leak post-esophagectomy: a systematic review. Dis Esophagus. 2021 Feb 10;34(2).

    Grigor EJM, Kaaki S, Fergusson DA, Maziak DE, Seely AJE. Interventions to prevent anastomotic leak after esophageal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Surg. 2021 Jan 18;21(1):42. 

  5. Guidelines

    None now

  6. literature search

    Literature search on the pages of pubmed.