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
Review
. 2021 May;9(10):910.
doi: 10.21037/atm-20-3906.

A narrative review of esophageal tissue engineering and replacement: where are we?

Affiliations
Review

A narrative review of esophageal tissue engineering and replacement: where are we?

Lynn Model et al. Ann Transl Med. 2021 May.

Abstract

Long-gap esophageal defects, whether congenital or acquired, are very difficult to manage. Any significant surgical peri-esophageal dissection that is performed to allow for potential stretching of two ends of a defect interrupts the esophageal blood supply and leads to complications such as leak and stricture, even in the youngest, healthiest patients. The term "congenital" applied to these defects refers mainly to long-gap esophageal atresia (LGA). Causes of acquired long-segment esophageal disruption include recurrent leaks and fistulae after primary repair, refractory GERD, caustic ingestions, cancer, and strictures. 5,000-10,000 patients per year in the US require esophageal replacement. Gastric, colonic, and jejunal pull-up surgeries are fraught with high rates of both short and long term complications thus creating a space for a better option. Since the 1970's many groups around the world have been unsuccessfully attempting esophageal replacement with tissue-engineered grafts in various animal models. But, recent advances in these models are now combining novel technologic advances in materials bioscience, stem-cell therapies, and transplantation and are showing increasing promise to human translational application. Transplantation has been heretofore unsuccessful, but given modern improvements in transplant microsurgery and immunosuppressive medications, pioneering trials in animal models are being undertaken now. These rapidly evolving medical innovations will be reviewed here.

Keywords: Esophagus; esophageal atresia; esophageal replacement; esophageal transplantation; tissue engineering.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: Both authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-3906). The series “Innovations and Updates in Esophageal Surgery” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. OW served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series and serves as an unpaid editorial board member of Annals of Translational Medicine from Oct 2019 to Sep 2021. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare.

References

    1. Kunisaki SM, Coran AG. Esophageal replacement. Semin Pediatr Surg 2017;26:105-15. 10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2017.02.006 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gallo G, Zwaveling S, Groen H, et al. Long-gap esophageal atresia: a meta-analysis of jejunal interposition, colon interposition, and gastric pull-up. Eur J Pediatr Surg 2012;22:420-5. 10.1055/s-0032-1331459 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Spitz L. Esophageal Replacement: overcoming the need. J Pediatr Surg 2014;49:849-52. 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2014.01.011 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Totonelli G, Maghsoudlou P, Fishman JM, et al. Esophageal tissue engineering:a new approach for esophageal replacement. World J Gastroenterol 2012;18:6900-7. 10.3748/wjg.v18.i47.6900 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Poghosyan T, Catry J, Luong-Nguyen M, et al. Esophageal tissue engineering: Current status and perspectives. J Visc Surg 2016;153:21-9. 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2015.11.009 - DOI - PubMed