File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Pyloroplasty in gastric replacement of the esophagus after esophagectomy: One-layer or two-layer technique?

TitlePyloroplasty in gastric replacement of the esophagus after esophagectomy: One-layer or two-layer technique?
Authors
Issue Date2000
PublisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing Asia. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/DES
Citation
Diseases Of The Esophagus, 2000, v. 13 n. 3, p. 203-206 How to Cite?
AbstractPyloroplasty is our routine drainage procedure performed when the stomach is used as the esophageal substitute after esophageal resection for cancer. The technique of pyloroplasty varies among surgeons and effectiveness has not been studied. Thirty-four patients with a gastric conduit whose pyloroplasty was constructed with a one-layer technique (group 1) were compared with a historical cohort of 31 patients treated with a two-layer method (group 2). Patients who had an abnormal pyloroduodenal region were excluded from the study. Perioperative morbidity and post-operative gastrointestinal symptoms within the first 6 months were evaluated. Patient demographics and the types of surgical procedures did not differ between the two groups. The median daily output from the nasogastric tube was 119 mL in group 1 and 115 mL in group 2 (p = 0.49). In 40 out of 65 patients (62%), the nasogastric tube was removed at a median of 3 days after the operation in both groups. There was no leakage from the pylorus or the esophagogastric anastomosis in this study. In both groups, the patients could resume a semisolid diet at a median of 8 days after surgery. One patient in group 1 and two patients in group 2 developed gastroparesis clinically. No patient, however, required reoperation. There was no significant difference in cardiopulmonary complications attributable to the technique of pyloroplasty. The incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms within the first 6 months after surgery did not differ. Regurgitation was the most common symptom, affecting 10 patients in each group, 29% and 32% in group 1 and group 2 respectively (p = 1.0). Pyloroplasty was an effective gastric drainage procedure after esophagectomy whether the one or two-layer method was used. The authors prefer the one-layer method, which is safe and simple.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/83765
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.146
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.760
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLee, YMen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLaw, Sen_HK
dc.contributor.authorChu, KMen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, Jen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T08:44:57Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T08:44:57Z-
dc.date.issued2000en_HK
dc.identifier.citationDiseases Of The Esophagus, 2000, v. 13 n. 3, p. 203-206en_HK
dc.identifier.issn1120-8694en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/83765-
dc.description.abstractPyloroplasty is our routine drainage procedure performed when the stomach is used as the esophageal substitute after esophageal resection for cancer. The technique of pyloroplasty varies among surgeons and effectiveness has not been studied. Thirty-four patients with a gastric conduit whose pyloroplasty was constructed with a one-layer technique (group 1) were compared with a historical cohort of 31 patients treated with a two-layer method (group 2). Patients who had an abnormal pyloroduodenal region were excluded from the study. Perioperative morbidity and post-operative gastrointestinal symptoms within the first 6 months were evaluated. Patient demographics and the types of surgical procedures did not differ between the two groups. The median daily output from the nasogastric tube was 119 mL in group 1 and 115 mL in group 2 (p = 0.49). In 40 out of 65 patients (62%), the nasogastric tube was removed at a median of 3 days after the operation in both groups. There was no leakage from the pylorus or the esophagogastric anastomosis in this study. In both groups, the patients could resume a semisolid diet at a median of 8 days after surgery. One patient in group 1 and two patients in group 2 developed gastroparesis clinically. No patient, however, required reoperation. There was no significant difference in cardiopulmonary complications attributable to the technique of pyloroplasty. The incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms within the first 6 months after surgery did not differ. Regurgitation was the most common symptom, affecting 10 patients in each group, 29% and 32% in group 1 and group 2 respectively (p = 1.0). Pyloroplasty was an effective gastric drainage procedure after esophagectomy whether the one or two-layer method was used. The authors prefer the one-layer method, which is safe and simple.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing Asia. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/DESen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofDiseases of the Esophagusen_HK
dc.subject.meshAnastomosis, Surgicalen_HK
dc.subject.meshDigestive System Surgical Procedures - methodsen_HK
dc.subject.meshEsophageal Neoplasms - surgeryen_HK
dc.subject.meshEsophagectomyen_HK
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshHumansen_HK
dc.subject.meshMaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_HK
dc.subject.meshPylorus - surgeryen_HK
dc.subject.meshReconstructive Surgical Proceduresen_HK
dc.subject.meshStomach - surgeryen_HK
dc.subject.meshSuture Techniquesen_HK
dc.titlePyloroplasty in gastric replacement of the esophagus after esophagectomy: One-layer or two-layer technique?en_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=1120-8694&volume=13&issue=3&spage=203&epage=206&date=2000&atitle=Pyloroplasty+in+gastric+replacement+of+the+esophagus+after+esophagectomy:+one-layer+or+two-layer+technique?en_HK
dc.identifier.emailLaw, S: slaw@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailChu, KM: chukm@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailWong, J: jwong@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLaw, S=rp00437en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityChu, KM=rp00435en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityWong, J=rp00322en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1046/j.1442-2050.2000.00112.xen_HK
dc.identifier.pmid11206633-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0034495163en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros58941en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0034495163&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume13en_HK
dc.identifier.issue3en_HK
dc.identifier.spage203en_HK
dc.identifier.epage206en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000166798800005-
dc.publisher.placeAustraliaen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLee, YM=8521465600en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLaw, S=7202241293en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChu, KM=7402453538en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, J=8049324500en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats