Korean J Gastroenterol.  2021 Oct;78(4):213-218. 10.4166/kjg.2021.072.

Is Hypertrophic or Keloid Wound Scar a Risk Factor for Stricture at Esophagogastric Anastomosis Site after Esophageal Cancer Operation?

• Seong YW
• Kim JH
• Ok YJ
• Oh SJ
• Choi JS
• Lee JS
• Moon HJ

• KMID: 2521495
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4166/kjg.2021.072

Abstract

Background/Aims
Anastomotic stricture at the esophagus and the conduit anastomosis site after the surgical resection of esophageal cancer is relatively common. This study examined whether a hypertrophic scar or keloid formation at a surgical wound is related to an anastomotic stricture.
Methods
From March 2007 to July 2017, 59 patients underwent curative surgery for esophageal cancer. In 38 patients, end-to-end anastomosis (EEA) of the esophagus and the conduit was performed using EEA 25 mm. A hypertrophic wound scar was defined when the width of the midline laparotomy wound scar exceeded 2 mm. The relationship between the hypertrophic scar and stricture and the other risk factors for anastomotic stricture in these 38 patients was analyzed.
Results
Of the 38 patients, eight patients (21.1%) had an anastomotic stricture, and a hypertrophic skin scar was observed in 14 patients (36.8%). Univariate analysis revealed lower BMI and hypertrophic scars as risk factors (p=0.032, p=0.001 respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed a hypertrophic scar as an independent risk factor for an anastomotic stricture (p=0.010, OR=27.06, 95% CI 2.19-334.40).
Conclusions
Hypertrophic wound scars can be a risk factor for anastomotic stricture after surgery for esophageal cancer. An earlier prediction of anastomotic stricture by detecting hypertrophic wound healing in patients undergoing esophagectomy may improve the patients’ quality of life and surgical outcomes by earlier treatments.

Keyword

Esophageal neoplasms; Esophageal stenosis; Esophagectomy; Anastomosis; surgical

Reference

1. Ma DY, Tan BX, Liu M, Li XF, Zhou YQ, Lu Y. 2014; Concurrent three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and chemotherapy for postoperative recurrence of mediastinal lymph node metastases in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a phase 2 single-institution study. Radiat Oncol. 9:28. DOI: 10.1186/1748-717X-9-28. PMID: 24438695. PMCID: PMC3927657.

2. Cassivi SD. 2004; Leaks, strictures, and necrosis: a review of anastomotic complications following esophagectomy. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 16:124–132. DOI: 10.1053/j.semtcvs.2004.03.011. PMID: 15197687.

3. Tanaka K, Makino T, Yamasaki M, et al. 2018; An analysis of the risk factors of anastomotic stricture after esophagectomy. Surg Today. 48:449–454. DOI: 10.1007/s00595-017-1608-5. PMID: 29170824.

4. Choi CW, Kang DH, Kim HW, et al. 2017; Clinical outcomes of dilation therapy for anastomotic esophageal stricture. Korean J Gastroenterol. 69:102–108. DOI: 10.4166/kjg.2017.69.2.102. PMID: 28239078.

5. Briel JW, Tamhankar AP, Hagen JA, et al. 2004; Prevalence and risk factors for ischemia, leak, and stricture of esophageal anastomosis: gastric pull-up versus colon interposition. J Am Coll Surg. 198:536–542. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2003.11.026. PMID: 15051003.

6. Ercan S, Rice TW, Murthy SC, Rybicki LA, Blackstone EH. 2005; Does esophagogastric anastomotic technique influence the outcome of patients with esophageal cancer? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 129:623–631. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2004.08.024. PMID: 15746747.

7. van Heijl M, Gooszen JA, Fockens P, Busch OR, van Lanschot JJ, van Berge Henegouwen MI. 2010; Risk factors for development of benign cervical strictures after esophagectomy. Ann Surg. 251:1064–1069. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181deb4b7. PMID: 20485137.

8. Tripathi S, Soni K, Agrawal P, Gour V, Mondal R, Soni V. 2020; Hypertrophic scars and keloids: a review and current treatment modalities. Biomedical Dermatology. 4:11. DOI: 10.1186/s41702-020-00063-8.

9. Rabello FB, Souza CD, Farina Júnior JA. 2014; Update on hypertrophic scar treatment. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 69:565–573. DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2014(08)11.

10. Park R, Martin S, Goldberg JD, Lepor H. 2001; Anastomotic strictures following radical prostatectomy: insights into incidence, effectiveness of intervention, effect on continence, and factors predisposing to occurrence. Urology. 57:742–746. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(00)01048-7.

11. Blackmon SH, Correa AM, Wynn B, et al. 2007; Propensity-matched analysis of three techniques for intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis. Ann Thorac Surg. 83:1805–1813. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2007.01.046. PMID: 17462404.

12. Heitmiller RF, Fischer A, Liddicoat JR. 1999; Cervical esophagogastric anastomosis: results following esophagectomy for carcinoma. Dis Esophagus. 12:264–269. DOI: 10.1046/j.1442-2050.1999.00051.x. PMID: 10770360.

13. Zhou D, Liu QX, Deng XF, Min JX, Dai JG. 2015; Comparison of two different mechanical esophagogastric anastomosis in esophageal cancer patients: a meta-analysis. J Cardiothorac Surg. 10:67. DOI: 10.1186/s13019-015-0271-4. PMID: 25952323. PMCID: PMC4456702.

14. Price TN, Nichols FC, Harmsen WS, et al. 2013; A comprehensive review of anastomotic technique in 432 esophagectomies. Ann Thorac Surg. 95:1154–1161. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.11.045. PMID: 23395626.

15. Markar SR, Arya S, Karthikesalingam A, Hanna GB. 2013; Technical factors that affect anastomotic integrity following esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 20:4274–4281. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-013-3189-x. PMID: 23943033.

16. Honda M, Kuriyama A, Noma H, Nunobe S, Furukawa TA. 2013; Hand-sewn versus mechanical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 257:238–248. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31826d4723. PMID: 23001084.

17. Zieren HU, Müller JM, Pichlmaier H. 1993; Prospective randomized study of one- or two-layer anastomosis following oesophageal resection and cervical oesophagogastrostomy. Br J Surg. 80:608–611. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800800519. PMID: 8518900.