The use of colonic interposition in esophageal replacement after esophagectomy for cancer results in similar morbidity, mortality, and long-term outcome compared with gastric transposition.
Prospectively collected database on patients with esophageal cancer from January 1, 1982, through December 31, 2000.
Academic university hospital department of surgery.
We compared 42 patients who underwent colonic interposition (colon group) with 959 patients who underwent gastric transposition (stomach group) after esophagectomy.
Main Outcome Measures
Morbidity, mortality, and long-term survival.
Greater blood loss (median, 1000 vs 700 mL; P<.001) and longer operation duration (median, 270 vs 225 minutes; P<.001) were encountered in the colon group. We found no difference in cardiopulmonary complications, but we found significantly greater incidences of anastomotic leakage (14.3% vs 3.9%; P = .007) and intra-abdominal septic complications (9.5% vs 0.2%; P<.001) in the colon group. Conduit ischemia developed in 5 patients (0.5%) in the stomach group, 3 of whom underwent successful staged reconstruction with colon. One patient (2.4%) in the colon group was found to have conduit ischemia and died. Hospital mortality rates included 7 patients (16.7%) from the colon group and 102 (10.6%) from the stomach group (P = .21). These figures improved to 0 and 27 (5.5%), respectively, in the second half of the study period (P>.99). Median survival was 12.8 and 10.4 months in the stomach and colon groups, respectively (P = .4).
Colonic interposition is a more complex procedure with increased morbidity, compared with gastric transposition. Overall mortality and survival, however, were similar to those for gastric transposition.