Changing trends in the minimally invasive surgery for corrosive esophagogastric stricture.

Raja Kalayarasan, Satish Durgesh
Author Information
  1. Raja Kalayarasan: Surgical Gastroenterology, JIPMER, Puducherry 605006, India. kalayarasanraja@yahoo.com.
  2. Satish Durgesh: Surgical Gastroenterology, JIPMER, Puducherry 605006, India.

Abstract

esophagogastric stricture is the troublesome long-term complication of corrosive ingestion with a significant adverse impact on the quality of life. Surgery remains the mainstay of therapy in patients where endoscopic treatment is not feasible or fails to dilate the stricture. Conventional surgical management of esophageal stricture is open esophageal bypass using gastric or colon conduit. Colon is the commonly used esophageal substitute, particularly in those with high pharyngoesophageal strictures and in patients with accompanying gastric strictures. Traditionally colon bypass is performed using an open technique that requires a long midline incision from the xiphisternum to the suprapubic area, with adverse cosmetic outcomes and long-term complications like an incisional hernia. As most of the affected patients are in the second or third decade of life minimally invasive approach is an attractive proposition. However, minimally invasive surgery for corrosive esophagogastric stricture is slow to evolve due to the complex nature of the surgical procedure. With advancements in laparoscopic skills and instrumentation, the feasibility and safety of minimally invasive surgery in corrosive esophagogastric stricture have been documented. Initial series have mainly used a laparoscopic-assisted approach, whereas more recent studies have shown the safety of a total laparoscopic approach. The changing trend from laparoscopic assisted procedure to a totally minimally invasive technique for corrosive esophagogastric stricture should be carefully disseminated to preclude adverse long-term outcomes. Also, well-designed trials with long-term follow-ups are required to document the superiority of minimally invasive surgery for corrosive esophagogastric stricture. The present review focuses on the challenges and changing trends in the minimally invasive treatment of corrosive esophagogastric stricture.

Keywords

References

  1. J Pediatr Surg. 2004 Mar;39(3):276-81; discussion 276-81 [PMID: 15017537]
  2. World J Surg. 2010 Apr;34(4):758-64 [PMID: 20098987]
  3. World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Jul 7;19(25):3918-30 [PMID: 23840136]
  4. Am J Gastroenterol. 1992 Jan;87(1):1-5 [PMID: 1728104]
  5. World J Surg. 2020 Dec;44(12):4153-4160 [PMID: 32754784]
  6. Indian J Gastroenterol. 1993 Oct;12(4):135-41 [PMID: 8270293]
  7. Trop Gastroenterol. 2011 Oct-Dec;32(4):333-5 [PMID: 22696922]
  8. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006 Apr;21(4):777-80 [PMID: 16677172]
  9. Indian J Surg. 2014 Feb;76(1):56-60 [PMID: 24799785]
  10. Ann Coloproctol. 2013 Dec;29(6):217-8 [PMID: 24466531]
  11. J Am Coll Surg. 2002 Aug;195(2):284-7 [PMID: 12168979]
  12. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2019 Apr;29(4):538-541 [PMID: 30758265]
  13. Surg Endosc. 2013 Oct;27(10):3726-32 [PMID: 23636519]
  14. Indian J Gastroenterol. 2006 Sep-Oct;25(5):269-70 [PMID: 17090859]
  15. Surg Endosc. 2003 Jan;17(1):115-7 [PMID: 12239651]
  16. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2012 Oct;15(4):713-5 [PMID: 22821650]
  17. Dis Esophagus. 2017 Apr 1;30(4):1-11 [PMID: 28375474]
  18. World J Gastroenterol. 2004 Oct 1;10(19):2846-9 [PMID: 15334683]
  19. J Pediatr Surg. 2013 Apr;48(4):887-92 [PMID: 23583153]
  20. Surg Endosc. 2012 Nov;26(11):3344-9 [PMID: 22552862]
  21. World J Emerg Surg. 2015 Sep 26;10:44 [PMID: 26413146]
  22. Ann Surg. 2011 Jul;254(1):62-6 [PMID: 21532530]
  23. Hepatogastroenterology. 2014 Jun;61(132):1033-41 [PMID: 26158162]
  24. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2009 Aug;47(7):689-90 [PMID: 19640233]
  25. J Am Coll Surg. 1999 Nov;189(5):508-22 [PMID: 10549740]
  26. J Pediatr Surg. 2010 May;45(5):1053-60 [PMID: 20438954]
  27. J Pediatr Surg. 2001 Jul;36(7):1004-7 [PMID: 11431765]
  28. Dis Esophagus. 2001;14(3-4):169-72 [PMID: 11869314]
  29. J Pediatr Surg. 1991 Jun;26(6):676-81 [PMID: 1941456]
  30. Eur J Surg. 1997 Apr;163(4):275-9 [PMID: 9161825]
  31. Pol Przegl Chir. 2017 Feb 28;89(1):76-83 [PMID: 28522789]
  32. J Minim Access Surg. 2019 Apr-Jun;15(2):161-163 [PMID: 29974876]
  33. Ann Surg. 2004 Mar;239(3):359-63 [PMID: 15075652]
  34. Surg Endosc. 2001 Feb;15(2):217 [PMID: 12200660]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0stricturecorrosiveminimallyinvasiveesophagogastriclong-termsurgeryadversepatientsesophagealapproachlaparoscopiclifeSurgerytreatmentsurgicalopenbypassusinggastriccolonusedstricturestechniqueoutcomesproceduresafetychangingtrendsEsophagogastrictroublesomecomplicationingestionsignificantimpactqualityremainsmainstaytherapyendoscopicfeasiblefailsdilateConventionalmanagementconduitColoncommonlysubstituteparticularlyhighpharyngoesophagealaccompanyingTraditionallyperformedrequireslongmidlineincisionxiphisternumsuprapubicareacosmeticcomplicationslikeincisionalherniaaffectedsecondthirddecadeattractivepropositionHoweverslowevolveduecomplexnatureadvancementsskillsinstrumentationfeasibilitydocumentedInitialseriesmainlylaparoscopic-assistedwhereasrecentstudiesshowntotaltrendassistedtotallycarefullydisseminatedprecludeAlsowell-designedtrialsfollow-upsrequireddocumentsuperioritypresentreviewfocuseschallengesChangingBypassCausticsLaparoscopyRoboticsStricture

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.