Background: A choice of retrosternal or orthotopic route for reconstruction exists after three-phase esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis. Whether the route of reconstruction affects postoperative morbidity, mortality and recurrence patterns remains controversial. Study Design: Patients with cancer of the thoracic esophagus who underwent three-phase esophagectomy between 1990 and 1999 were studied. Postoperative outcome, recurrence patterns and survival were analyzed from a prospectively collected database. Results: Seventy-five patients underwent three-phase esophagectomy. There were 46 patients in the retrosternal group and 29 in the orthotopic group. The mean age of the retrosternal group was younger than the orthotopic group, 60 and 66 years, respectively (p = 0.004). The retrosternal group also had more advanced disease; 24% of patients had curative resection compared with 59% in the orthotopic group (p = 0.003). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications except that the retrosternal group had more blood loss, median 800 ml compared with 700 ml (p = 0.04). Hospital mortality was 13% in the retrosternal group and 3.4% in the orthotopic group (p = 0.24). Multivariate analysis showed that age (odds ratio 1.16, p = 0.035) and pulmonary risk (odds ratio 10, p = 0.01) were predictive of hospital mortality, but not the route of reconstruction. No patient in the retrosternal group developed recurrence in the gastric conduit compared to 4 of 28 patients (14%) in the orthotopic group (p = 0.03). Two of these patients were symptomatic with bleeding from the intragastric recurrence. Survival was worse in the retrosternal group, 5-year survival was 29.8 vs. 8.2% (p < 0.01), reflecting the more advanced disease and higher prevalence of palliative resections. Conclusions: Cardiopulmonary complications and hospital mortality were not significantly different in the two groups. Recurrent tumor infiltration of the gastric conduit occurred in 14% of patients when the orthotopic route was used.

Purpose: Ascending aortic replacement is a common emergency procedure for treating acute type A aortic dissection. Secondary open or endovascular interventions for residual arch pathologies is difficult because of adhesions, short prosthetic grafts, and distorted anatomies. Aortic arch branched stent grafts have emerged as a potential solution for these patients if they have suitable anatomical conditions. This study aimed to evaluate the theoretical anatomical and technical feasibility of 2 currently used aortic arch branch endografts in patients who had prior replacement of the ascending aorta. Materials and Methods: All patients who had a prosthetic ascending aortic or hemiarch replacement for acute type A dissection in a single institution between January 2013 and December 2018 were included. Contrast computed tomography images on the most recent follow-up were analyzed on a 3-dimensional workstation. Morphological parameters were measured individually for the ascending aorta, aortic arch, supra-aortic branches, and access iliac arteries. The computed tomography scan of each patient was individually evaluated for anatomical suitability for the arch branched and double-branch devices according to set selection criteria. Results: Computed tomography images of 56 patients (median age of 57 years, 45 males) were reviewed. Based on our evaluation, 26 patients (46.4%) were good candidates for an endovascular arch branched device. It would be feasible for 13 patients (23.2%), but prudent preoperative planning was required due to complicated anatomy. The other 17 patients (30.4%) were unsuitable because they met at least 1 exclusion criterion. Short prosthetic grafts, extreme graft angulations, and extensive dissections in the supra-aortic branches were the main reasons for exclusion. Conclusion: Endovascular repair using arch branched endografts is feasible in patients with prior ascending aortic arch or hemiarch replacement for acute type A aortic dissection. The most common anatomical conditions that may influence the feasibility of the arch branched endograft procedure include insufficient proximal seal length, severe angulation of the graft, and extensive aortic dissection within the supra-aortic vessels.

were prospectively included in the single center registry study. The primary outcome was death from any causes. Results-A total of 140 patients who were confirmed with Stanford type A aortic dissection involving aortic arch by CTA on admission were enrolled. The mean (AESD) age was 61.8AE7.3 years; 35.7% of the patients were women. Either ascending graft branch approach (18.6%) or femoral artery approach (81.4%) was applied for delivery of endovascular grafts into aortic arch. The incidence of death at 30 days and 1 year were 6.4% and 10.3%, respectively. The incidence of radiological diagnosis of stroke and endoleak at 30 days were 3.6% and 7.1%. In multivariate models, patient age (!60) was associated with reduced survival and antegrade deployment of endovascular graft through ascending graft branch was associated with increased risk of endoleak. Conclusion-The results of this registry study revealed the clinical experience of endovascular aortic