Outcomes for Correction of Long-Gap Esophageal Atresia: A 22-Year Experience

Abstract

BackgroundLong-gap esophageal atresia (LGEA) precludes immediate primary repair. When delayed primary esophagoesophagostomy (DPE) is not feasible, a reverse gastric tube (RGT) is a potential salvage option. The purpose of this study was to determine if DPE and RGT had both similar short-term and long-term outcomes. MethodsA retrospective review of all EA patients from 1994 to 2016 was undertaken. Data were stratified by surgical management (DPE versus RGT). Baseline demographics, operative information, postoperative management, and complications were analyzed. Descriptive statistics were used and P-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. ResultsTwo hundred and eighteen patients with EA were treated during this period; 37/218 (17%) had LGEA. Mean gap length was 3.3 ± 1.2 cm. Thirty-three patients underwent some form of repair, all of which were managed initially with a gastrostomy tube feeds. Twenty-five patients underwent DPE with 89% of these never requiring revision, and 86% having excellent function with long-term follow-up. In eight patients, esophageal length was never adequate for DPE; therefore, six were reconstructed with RGT, and two underwent gastric transposition. There were no significant differences in complications, revisions, ventilator days, overall length of stay, weight percentiles, or conduit function between children undergoing RGT compared with DPE at a mean follow-up of 5.5 years. ConclusionsSurgical treatment of LGEA is complex, and controversy exists regarding the optimal repair method when DPE is not feasible. In this series, DPE after gastrostomy tube feeds often allowed for sufficient esophageal lengthening with satisfactory long-term esophageal function. However, when adequate length for DPE was not attainable, these data suggest that RGT is a viable conduit with favorable postoperative outcomes.