Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jul;112(1):255-263.
doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.08.022. Epub 2020 Oct 17.

Risk Factors and Consequences of Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy for Cancer

Affiliations

Risk Factors and Consequences of Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy for Cancer

Eliza R C Hagens et al. Ann Thorac Surg. 2021 Jul.

Erratum in

  • Corrigendum.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] Ann Thorac Surg. 2024 Jul;118(1):289-290. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2024.05.006. Ann Thorac Surg. 2024. PMID: 38910010 No abstract available.

Abstract

Background: Identifying predictors of anastomotic leakage can contribute to prevention of this common complication after esophagectomy. This study identified predictors for anastomotic leakage and assessed the influence of anastomotic leakage on short-term outcomes and long-term survival.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of consecutive patients who underwent esophagectomy in the Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location Amsterdam Medical Center, between 1993 and 2019. Multilevel logistic and Cox regression models were used to assess predictors for anastomotic leakage and survival, and an operation year-level random effects was considered for the unmeasured characteristics at year of operation.

Results: Included were 1539 patients, and anastomotic leakage developed in 288 (19%). Predictors for developing anastomotic leakage after a transthoracic esophagectomy were a higher body mass index and a cervical anastomosis. Diabetes mellitus type 2 and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were predictors for anastomotic leakage after a transhiatal esophagectomy. Median intensive care unit and hospital stay was longer for patients with anastomotic leakage than for patients without anastomotic leakage (both P < .001 for transthoracic esophagectomy, P = .010 and P < .001, respectively, for transhiatal esophagectomy). A higher percentage of patients with anastomotic leakage died within 30 days (3.8% vs 1.9%, P = .050). However, anastomotic leakage did not significantly influence long-term survival (hazard ratio, 0.994; 95% CI, 0.849-1.176; P = .994).

Conclusions: Higher body mass index, cervical anastomosis, diabetes mellitus, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are predictors for anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy. Anastomotic leakage is associated with worse short-term outcomes, but long-term survival was not influenced. Future studies should focus on patient optimization, accurate patient selection, and development of tools in risk assessment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources