Gastric-tube versus whole-stomach esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PLoS One. 2017 Mar 7;12(3):e0173416. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173416. eCollection 2017.

Abstract

Objectives: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing the gastric-tube vs. whole-stomach for esophageal cancer in order to determine the optimal surgical technique of esophagectomy.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, ScienceDirect, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Clinical trials that compared the gastric-tube versus whole-stomach for esophageal cancer were selected. The clinical endpoints included anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stenosis, reflux esophagitis, pneumonia, delayed gastric emptying, and thoracic stomach syndrome.

Results: A total of 6 articles (1571 patients) were included. Compared to the whole-stomach approach, the gastric-tube approach was associated with a lower incidence of reflux esophagitis (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.16 to 0.81, p = 0.01) and thoracic stomach syndrome (95% CI: 0.17 to 0.55, p < 0.0001). The rates of anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stenosis, pneumonia, and delayed gastric emptying did not significantly differ between the two groups.

Conclusions: The gastric-tube esophagectomy is superior to the whole-stomach approach, as it is associated with a lower incidence of postoperative reflux esophagitis and thoracic stomach syndrome. Our findings must be validated in large-scale randomized controlled trials.

Publication types

  • Meta-Analysis
  • Review
  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • Anastomotic Leak / etiology
  • Esophageal Neoplasms / surgery*
  • Esophagectomy / adverse effects
  • Esophagectomy / methods*
  • Esophagitis, Peptic / etiology
  • Humans
  • Pneumonia / etiology
  • Publication Bias

Grants and funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.