These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Technique and results of colonic esophagoplasties].
    Author: Thomas P, Giudicelli R, Fuentes P, Reboud E.
    Journal: Ann Chir; 1996; 50(2):106-20. PubMed ID: 8762261.
    Abstract:
    From 1985 to 1995, 60 patients with a mean age of 52 +/- 12 years [24-78] underwent colon interposition for esophageal replacement. Indications were esophageal cancer (n = 37), benign stricture (n = 13), iatrogenic esophageal fistula (n = 5), achalasia with megaesophagus (n = 3), and necrosis of a previous substitute (n = 2). Colon interposition represented only 18.5% of all operations performed for oesophageal replacement during the same period. The colon was selected because of inadequate stomach in 33 cases (55%). Long-segment conduit based on the ascending branch of the left colonic artery was the preferred method and could be used in 52 patients (86.7%). The colon was placed in the esophageal bed in 38 patients (63.3%), substernally in 21 (35%), and subcutaneously in 1. Overall operative mortality and morbidity were 8.3% and 65% respectively. Five-year survival rate was 9% in the 37 patients with esophageal cancer. Seven patients (13.5%) required one or more dilatations of the esophagocolonic anastomosis. At last follow-up, 34 patients (65.4%) had no difficulty eating. Multivariate analysis identified the conduit position in the posterior mediastinum as an independent predictor of good functional result (p = 0.0018). We conclude that colon interposition for esophageal replacement provides satisfactory and durable function; however, early mortality and morbidity are substantial.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]