Long-gap oesophageal atresia: comparison of delayed primary anastomosis and oesophageal replacement with gastric tube

Abstract

Background: Long-gap oesophageal atresia (LGOA) causes significant early and long-term morbidity. We conducted a retrospective 25-year review comparing outcomes of delayed primary anastomosis versus oesophageal replacement with greater curvature gastric tube.

Methods: Records of 44 consecutive patients undergoing LGOA repair (1986-2010) were obtained from OA database with ethics approval and were analysed for complication and long-term outcomes. Analysis was conducted using Student's t-test for quantitative and Fisher exact test for qualitative data.

Results: Thirty (68%) patients underwent delayed primary anastomosis and 14 (32%) had oesophageal replacement. Oesophageal replacement patients had longer gaps (mean 5.5 vertebrae, range 4-9) compared to delayed primary anastomosis (mean 3.9, range 2-6) (p=0.004), but no difference in perioperative complications (p=0.2) (Table 1). Oesophageal replacement had more long-term complications (86%) compared to delayed primary anastomosis (30%) (p=0.005). Almost all patients (>90%) experienced gastro-oesophageal reflux and 21 delayed primary anastomosis patients (70%) underwent fundoplication. 60% of delayed primary anastomosis and 64.3% of oesophageal replacement patients had continued gastrointestinal symptoms years after repair.

Conclusions: Our experience indicates that LGOA can be repaired safely using both methods, with no deaths and similar perioperative risk, but high long-term morbidity mandates long-term follow-up of these patients. Delayed primary anastomosis has a better long-term outcome compared to oesophageal replacement with gastric tube.

Keywords: Delayed primary anastomosis; Long gap; Oesophageal atresia; Oesophageal replacement.