Long-gap esophageal atresia: gastric transposition or esophageal lengthening with delayed primary anastomosis? A systematic review
Topic overview
This systematic review compares two surgical approaches for long-gap esophageal atresia: gastric transposition versus esophageal lengthening with delayed anastomosis. Both procedures carry significant morbidity, with esophageal lengthening requiring more frequent anti-reflux surgery and dilations, while gastric transposition shows higher respiratory complications.
Key takeaways
- No comparative studies exist between gastric transposition and esophageal lengthening for LGEA, limiting evidence-based surgical decision-making.
- Esophageal lengthening requires more reoperations (58% anti-reflux surgery, 55% dilations) versus gastric transposition (30% total reoperations).
- Anastomotic complications are twice as common after esophageal lengthening (64%) compared to gastric transposition (30%).
- Gastric transposition has higher respiratory morbidity (40%) and risk of nerve injury (5%) versus esophageal lengthening (6% respiratory, 0% nerve).
- Mortality is low and similar between approaches (1 death each), but significant morbidity persists with both surgical techniques for LGEA.
Keywords
Hashtags
Full article text
Full article text not available for this entry
How to cite: GlobalCastMD. Long-gap esophageal atresia: gastric transposition or esophageal lengthening with delayed primary anastomosis? A systematic review. GlobalCastMD Medical Library. 2024-04-24. https://dev.library.globalcastmd.com/article/8545?via_space=staycurrentmd
Comments