Abstract
Purpose
The choice of Esophageal replacement (ER) depends on surgeons’ preference and patients’
anatomical condition. A cross-sectional study was done to compare the long-term outcomes
of two methods of ER, Gastric transposition (GT) and Colonic interposition (CI).
Methods
Children who had undergone ER from January 1997 to December 2017 with a minimum of
two-year post-ER follow-up were evaluated by anthropometry, hepatobiliary scintigraphy,
gastroesophageal reflux study, gastric emptying test, pulmonary function test and
blood tests.
Results
Twenty-six (Male:female=17:9) children were recruited. The median age at ER was 13
months (interquartile range 9–40 months) and mean follow-up post-ER was 116.7 ± 76.4
months (range 24–247 months). GT:CI was done in 15(57.7%):11(42.3%) cases. A greater
number of abnormal oral contrast studies (p = 0.02) and re-operations (p = 0.05) were documented as baseline characteristics with CI group. The presence of
gastroesophageal reflux 9/23(39.1%), duodenogastric reflux 6/24(25%), delayed gastric
emptying 6/25(24%), abnormal pulmonary function test 14/22(63.6%) were documented
during the study period. However, there was no significant(p>0.05) difference in nutritional, developmental and functional outcomes of both operative
methods of ER in the study.
Conclusion
Assessment of nutritional, developmental and functional parameters in children after
ER reveals good long-term results. There was no significant difference in CI and GT.
Level of evidence
Comparative study; II
Keywords
Abbreviations:
EA (Congenital Esophageal atresia), ER (Esophageal replacement), CI (Colonic Interposition), CIN (Corrosive injury), DGR (Duodenogastric reflux), GER (Gastroesophageal reflux), GET (Gastric emptying time), GT (Gastric Transposition)To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Pediatric SurgeryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Surgical techniques for esophageal replacement in children.Pediatr Surg Int. 2017; 33: 527-550https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-016-4048-1
- Primary gastric pull-up in pure esophageal atresia: technique, feasibility and outcome. A prospective observational study.Pediatr Surg Int. 2011; 27: 583-585https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-010-2835-7
- Surgical outcomes of different approaches to esophageal replacement in long-gap esophageal atresia: a systematic review.Medicine (Baltimore). 2017; 96 (Baltimore): e6942https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000006942
- Esophageal replacement.Semin Pediatr Surg. 2017; 26: 105-115https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2017.02.006
- Oesophageal replacement in children.Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2008; 90: 7-12https://doi.org/10.1308/003588408X242222
- Revised IAP growth charts for height, weight and body mass index for 5-to 18-year-old Indian children.Indian Pediatr. 2015; 52: 47-55https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-015-0566-5
- Which is better for esophageal substitution in children, esophagocoloplasty or gastric transposition? A 27-year experience of a single center.J Pediatr Surg. 2007; 42: 500-504https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2006.10.042
- Colonic interposition for esophageal replacement in children remains a good choice: 33-year median follow-up of 65 patients.J Pediatr Surg. 2010; 45: 341-345https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.10.065
- Gastric transposition in children. A 21 years experience.J Pediatr Surg. 2004; 39: 276-281https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2003.11.032
- Pediatric esophageal substitution by gastric pull-up and gastric tube.J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2016; 21: 110-114https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-9261.182582
- Transposed intrathoracic stomach: functional evaluation.Afr J Paediatr Surg. 2012; 9: 210-216https://doi.org/10.4103/0189-6725.104722
- 14 Years' experience of esophageal replacement surgeries.Pediatr Surg Int. 2020; 36: 835-841https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-020-04649-5
- Esophageal replacement in children: challenges and long-term outcomes.J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2016; 21: 98-105https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-9261.182580
- Gastric transposition in children.Semin Pediatr Surg. 2009; 18: 30-33https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2008.10.006
- Long-gap esophageal atresia: a meta-analysis of jejunal interposition, colon interposition, and gastric pull-up.Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2012; 22: 420-425https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1331459
- Late morbidity after colon interposition for corrosive esophageal injury: risk factors, management, and outcome. A 20-years experience.Ann Surg. 2010; 252: 271-280https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181e8fd40
- Post-operative management of esophageal atresia–tracheoesophageal fistula and gastroesophageal reflux: a Canadian Association of Pediatric Surgeons annual meeting survey.J Pediatr Surg. 2014; 49: 716-719https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2014.02.052
- Caustic ingestion in children-A review.Semin Pediatr Surg. 2017; 26: 95-104https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2017.02.002
- Evaluation of an antireflux procedure for colonic interposition in pediatric esophageal replacements.J Pediatr Surg. 2011; 46: 594-600https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.10.032
- Long-term follow-up after esophageal replacement in children: 45-Year single-center experience.J Pediatr Surg. 2015; 50: 1457-1461https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2015.03.065
- Outcomes of esophageal replacement: gastric pull-up and colonic interposition procedures.Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2018; 28: 22-29https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1607041
- Esophageal replacement in the neonatal period in infants with esophageal atresia and tracheoesophageal fistula.J Pediatr Surg. 2007; 42: 1471-1477https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2007.04.001
- Long-term functional outcomes after replacement of the esophagus in pediatric patients: a systematic literature review.J Pediatr Surg. 2017; 52: 1398-1408https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2017.05.034
- Gastric transposition for esophageal replacement in children: experience with 41 consecutive cases with special emphasis on esophageal atresia.Ann Surg. 2002; 236: 531-539https://doi.org/10.1097/01.SLA.0000030752.45065.D1
- Respiratory function after esophageal replacement in children.J Pediatr Surg. 2017; 52: 1736-1741https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2017.03.046
- Esophageal atresia and transitional care—Step 1: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to define the prevalence of chronic long-term problems.Am J Surg. 2015; 209: 747-759https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.09.019
- Long-term respiratory symptoms following oesophageal atresia: respiratory outcome after oesophageal atresia.Acta Paediatr. 2011; 100: 1222-1225https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1651-2227.2011.02279.x
- An European multicentric study of esophageal replacements: gastric pull-up, jejunal interposition, colonic interposition.Allied J Clin Pathol. 2017; 1: 9-12
- Esophageal replacement: overcoming the need.J Pediatr Surg. 2014; 49: 849-852https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2014.01.011
- Long-term outcome of colon interposition after esophagectomy in children.J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2008; 47: 458-462https://doi.org/10.1097/MPG.0b013e31815ce55c
- Long-term outcomes of patients with tracheoesophageal fistula/esophageal atresia: survey results from tracheoesophageal fistula/esophageal atresia online communities.Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2015; 26: 476-480https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1570103
- Long-term endoscopic and flow cytometric follow-up of colon interposition.J Pediatr Surg. 1992; 27: 859-861https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3468(92)90384-j
- Erudition after neonatal gastric transposition for esophageal atresia at 10 years of follow-up.J Neonatal Surg. 2021; 10: 37https://doi.org/10.47338/jns.v10.981
Article info
Publication history
Published online: May 10, 2022
Accepted:
May 5,
2022
Received in revised form:
May 5,
2022
Received:
August 23,
2021
Identification
Copyright
© 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
