There is no consensus on the timing of extubation after esophagectomy. There is a fear that premature extubation may result in a high risk of urgent reintubation. On the other hand, there is a risk of lung damage in prolonged intubation. The present systematic review compares early and late extubation. Five articles were selected. Early extubation after esophagectomy does not increase the risk of reintubation, mortality, complications, and length of stay.
Summary Introduction: Achalasia may evolve to sigmoid megaesophagus in 10–15% of patients and is usually treated with esophagectomy, which has high morbi-mortality. Many surgeons debate the applicability of the Heller myotomy for treating sigmoid megaesophagus. This study intents to analyze the effectiveness of myotomy for treating patients with sigmoid megaesophagus. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, Lilacs and Embase alongside manual search of references. The inclusion criteria were clinical trials, cohort, case-series; patients with sigmoid megaesophagus and esophageal diameter ≥ 6 cm; and patients undergoing primary myotomy. The exclusion criteria were reviews, case reports, cross-sectional studies, editorials, letters, congress abstracts, full-text unavailability; previous surgical treatment for achalasia; and pediatric or animal model studies. No restrictions on language and date of publication, and no filters were applied. Subgroups analyses were performed to assess the laparoscopic myotomy perioperative outcomes. Besides, subgroup analyses were performed to assess the long-term outcomes of the studies with a follow-up time > 24 months. To verify heterogeneity, the I2 test was used. The random effects were applied, and the fixed model was evaluated as sensitivity analysis. To assess risk of bias and certainty of evidence, the tools ROBINS-I and GRADE were used, respectively. Registration number: CRD42020199667. Results: Sixteen articles were selected, encompassing 350 patients. The mean age ranged from 36 to 61 years old, and the mean follow-up ranged from 16 to 109 months. Complications rate was 0.08 (CI: 0.040–0.153; P = 0.01). Need for retreatment rate was 0.128 (CI: 0.031–0.409; P = 0.01). The probability of good or excellent outcomes after myotomy was 0.762 (CI: 0.703–0.812; P < 0.01). Postoperative mortality rate was 0.008 (CI: 0.004–0.015; P < 0.01). Conclusion: Surgical myotomy is an option for avoiding esophagectomy in achalasia, with a low morbi-mortality rate and good results. It is effective for most patients and only a minority will demand retreatment.
There is no agreement whether prophylactic thoracic duct ligation (TDL), with or without resection, during esophagectomy for patients with cancer is beneficial. The effects of these procedures on postoperative complications and overall survival remain unclear. This systematic review included 16 articles. TDL did not influence short‐ and long‐term outcomes. However, thoracic duct resection increased postoperative chylothorax and overall complications, with no improvement in survival.
Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a widely studied and highly prevalent condition. However, few is reported about the exact efficacy and safety of fundoplication (FPT) compared to oral intake proton-pump inhibitors (PPI). This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT) aims to compare PPI and FPT in relation to the efficacy, as well as the adverse events associated with these therapies. Methods This systematic review was guided by PRISMA statement. Search carried out in June 2020 was conducted on Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE and LILACS. The inclusion criteria were (I) patients with GERD; (II) Randomized clinical trials, comparing oral intake PPI with FPT; (III) relevant outcomes for this review. The exclusion criteria were (I) reviews, case reports, editorials and letters (II) transoral or endoscopic FPT (III) studies with no full text. No restrictions were set for language or period. Certainty of evidence and risk of bias were assessed with GRADE Pro and with Review Manager Version 5.4 bias assessment tool. Results Ten RCT were included. Meta-analysis showed that heartburn (RD = −0.19; 95% CI = −0.29, −0.09) was less frequently reported by patients that underwent FPT. Furthermore, patients undergoing surgery had greater pressure on the lower esophageal sphincter than those who used PPI (MD = 7.81; 95% CI 4.79, 10.83). There was no significant difference between groups in the percentage of time with pH less than 4 in 24 hours, sustained remission and Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale. Finally, FPT did not increase significantly the risk for adverse events such as postoperative dysphagia and impaired belching. Conclusion FPT is a more effective therapy than PPI treatment for GERD, without significantly increasing the risk for adverse events. However, before indicating a possible surgical approach, it is extremely important to correctly assess and select the patients who would benefit from FPT, such as those with severe erosive esophagitis, severe respiratory symptoms, low adherence to continuous drug treatment and patients with non-acid reflux, to ensure better results.
This study aims to estimate whether prophylactic cervical lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer influences the short-and long-term results through a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Twenty-eight articles were selected in this systematic review, encompassing 9180 patients. Prophylactic neck lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer should be performed with caution, as it is associated with worse short-term results compared to traditional two-field lymphadenectomy and does not improve long-term survival.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.