Evolution and critical appraisal of anastomotic technique following resection of esophageal adenocarcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to critically evaluate acute and long-term complications of hand-sewn and semimechanical cervical esophagogastric anastomosis following resection of primary esophageal adenocarcinoma. Between February 1991 and 2001, 91 consecutive patients underwent subtotal esophagectomy (transthoracic, n=49; transhiatal, n=42), transposing a gastric tube based on the right gastroepiploic artery. All esophagogastric anastomoses were performed in the left neck using a hand-sewn technique (n=53) and, from September 1997, a side-to-side semimechanical technique (n=38). Outcomes evaluated were anastomotic leak rates, length of stay, and development of strictures. Postoperative mortality was 4.4% (all cardiopulmonary causes). Fifty-eight patients (63.7%) had an uncomplicated postoperative course, with a median postoperative length of stay of 10 days (vs. 20 days with associated morbidity; P </= 0.001). Anastomotic leaks were the leading cause of postoperative morbidity (16.5%, 15/91), and were classified into four types based on severity. The semimechanical anastomotic technique was associated with a reduced leak rate compared with the hand-sewn technique (7.9%, 3/38 vs. 22.6%, 12/53; P=0.08), although different patterns of anastomotic failure were seen following semimechanical anastomoses, with increased mediastinal and pleural sepsis. Anastomotic strictures developed in nine (17.0%) hand-sewn and three (7.9%) semimechanical anastomoses. Our conclusion was that a semimechanical technique for cervical esophagogastrostomy is associated with reduced anastomotic leak rates compared with hand-sewn anastomoses, resulting in a shorter postoperative stay. Patterns of anastomotic failure varied between each technique, possibly as a consequence of a longer cervical esophageal segment required for construction of a semimechanical anastomosis. The association between anastomotic technique and stricture development was not clear from this study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".