Abstract
Pyloric drainage procedures, namely pyloromyotomy or pyloroplasty, have long been considered an integral aspect of esophagectomy. However, the requirement of pyloric drainage in the era of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has been brought into question. This is in part because of the technical challenges of performing the pyloric drainage laparoscopically, leading many surgical teams to explore other options or to abandon this procedure entirely. We have developed a novel, technically facile, endoscopic approach to pyloromyotomy, and sought to assess the efficacy of this new approach compared to the standard surgical pyloromyotomy. Patients who underwent MIE for cancer from 01/2010 to 12/2019 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database and were divided into two groups according to the pyloric drainage procedure: endoscopic or surgical pyloric drainage. 30-day outcomes (complications, length of stay, readmissions) and pyloric drainage-related outcomes [conduit distension/width, nasogastric tube (NGT) duration and re-insertion, gastric stasis] were compared between groups. 94 patients were identified of these 52 patients underwent endoscopic PM and 42 patients underwent surgical PM. The groups were similar with respect to age, gender and comorbidities. There were more Ivor-Lewis esophagectomies in the endoscopic PM group than the surgical PM group [45 (86%), 15 (36%) p < 0.001]. There was no significant difference in the rate of complications and readmissions. Gastric stasis requiring NGT re-insertion was rare in the endoscopic PM group and did not differ significantly from the surgical PM group (1.9-4.7% p = 0.58). Endoscopic pyloromyotomy using a novel approach is a safe, quick and reproducible technique with comparable results to a surgical PM in the setting of MIE.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have