食管切除术后吻合口瘘相关危险因素及治疗策略分析
Analysis of Risk Factors and Treatment Strategy of Anastomotic Leakage after Esophagectomy
DOI: 10.12677/ACM.2021.118516, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 372  浏览: 580 
作者: 刘润泽, 常 栋:首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院胸外科,北京
关键词: 食管癌食管癌根治术吻合口瘘危险因素Esophageal Cancer Radical Resection of Esophageal Cancer Anastomotic Fistula Risk Factors
摘要: 目的:食管切除术后吻合口瘘是食管癌手术治疗最严重的并发症之一,目前手术治疗仍是食管癌最重要的治疗手段。本研究就食管癌(esophageal carcinoma, EC)术后吻合口瘘的定义、分类、危险因素、诊断与治疗方法等方面的研究现状进行回顾性综述。方法:检索PubMed,中国知网,临床试验注册台(Clinical Trials.gov),以食管癌,食管癌根治术,吻合口瘘,危险因素为关键词,检索2000~2020的相关文献,纳入标准:1) 食管癌术后吻合口瘘的危险因素;2) 吻合口瘘的治疗及预防措施;3) 吻合口瘘的实验室及影像学诊断。根据纳入标准分析45篇。结果:食管癌术后吻合口瘘的临床症状和严重程度多种多样,再加上种类繁多的诊断和治疗技术,使得目前AL的临床治疗仍是基于个体化的治疗方法。结论:食管癌术后吻合口瘘严重影响着患者的治疗质量和生命安全,外科医师应当重视该并发症的预防及治疗,对于高危患者应事先采取预防措施;对于怀疑吻合口瘘的患者,应当早发现、早治疗。
Abstract: Objective: Anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy is one of the most serious complications in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer. Surgical treatment is still the most important treatment for esophageal cancer. In this study, the research status of definition, classification, risk factors, diagnosis and treatment of anastomotic leakage after esophageal cancer operation was reviewed retrospectively. Methods: Search PubMed, CNKI, Clinical Trial Registration Station (Clinical Trials.gov), with “esophageal cancer, radical resection of esophageal cancer, anastomotic fistula, risk factors” from 2000 to 2020. Inclusion criteria are: 1) risk factors of anastomotic fistula after esophageal cancer operation; 2) treatment and prevention of anastomotic leakage; 3) laboratory and imaging diagnosis of anastomotic leakage. Forty-five articles were analyzed according to inclusion criteria. Results: The clinical symptoms and severity of anastomotic leakage after esophageal cancer operation are varied, so as diagnostic and therapeutic techniques. Thus the clinical treatment of AL (anastomotic leakage) is still based on individualized treatment. Conclusion: Anastomotic leakage after esophageal cancer surgery seriously affects the quality of the treatment and safety of patients. Surgeons should pay much more attention to the prevention and treatment of this complication. Precautionary measures should be taken for the high-risk patients. For patients suspected of anastomotic fistula, early detection and treatment should be performed. Additionally it should be detected and treated early for suspicious patients.
文章引用:刘润泽, 常栋. 食管切除术后吻合口瘘相关危险因素及治疗策略分析[J]. 临床医学进展, 2021, 11(8): 3535-3541. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2021.118516

1. 前言

近年来,食管癌的发生率在全球范围内呈现逐渐上升趋势,其发病率和死亡率在所有恶性肿瘤中分别排名第8位和第6位 [1]。目前,针对食管癌的治疗方法主要包括手术切除、化疗和放射治疗,而这其中,手术是治疗非转移性食管癌的基石 [2]。虽然随着现代医学的进步尤其是现代外科手术学的进步,食管癌切除术后吻合口瘘的发生率逐渐降低,但相较于其他恶性肿瘤的治疗预后,其严重并发症发生率,尤其是术后吻合口瘘(Anastomotic Leakage, AL)发生率仍明显高于其他疾病,相关研究统计,食管切除术后颈部和胸腔内吻合口的AL发生率分别为8%~35%和4%~44% [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]。AL的发生不仅会加重患者的痛苦和经济负担,严重时甚至会导致患者死亡。因此分析造成吻合口瘘的危险因素,制定针对性的预防对策,找到高效便捷的治疗方法,降低患者术后死亡率是目前食管癌手术治疗的主要研究方向。

2. 食管癌术后吻合口瘘的定义

食管切除术并发症共识小组(ECCG) [8] 将食管切除术后吻合口瘘定义为“涉及食道、吻合口、缝合线或导管的全层胃肠道缺损,而不考虑其表现形式或识别方法。”ECCG同时将吻合口瘘分为三类:I型:不需要特殊处理的局部缺损;II型:局部缺损需要介入治疗(如支架)而非手术治疗;III型:需要手术治疗。另外,根据症状严重程度,AL可分为4级,1级(无临床症状)通过放射学或内镜诊断;2级(轻微临床症状)显示局部炎性病变;3级(明显临床症状)表现为严重的败血症;4级(坏死)主要由内镜诊断。

3. 危险因素

既往研究结果表明吻合口瘘的发生与多种因素有关,包括:高龄、肥胖、营养不良、吸烟史、糖尿病史、放疗史、手术时间过长、吻合口位置、吻合口张力过高、血运不佳及一些非甾体抗炎药物的使用等。这些因素在不同的临床试验中被证实,但是不同临床试验所报道的危险因素全面性并不相同。

相关文献报道指出,食管吻合口处组织血流量小于10 ml/min/100 g组织的患者出现术后吻合口渗瘘的概率明显高于其他患者,这表明吻合口处组织的血流灌注量可能是导致术后吻合口瘘的一项主要预测因素 [8]。为了对抗食管切除术后食管吻合口处出现组织灌注不足的情况,上世纪90年代末,Akiyama [9]、Nagawa [10]、Murikami [11] 等人就已经开始尝试在术前对胃左动脉、胃右动脉远端和脾动脉进行栓塞,营造出乏血供的状态,并数日后行手术治疗,以此来保证术后吻合口的血流供应充足。2004年,Reavis等人根据缺血预处理的理念设计动物实验,在术前4周结扎小鼠左、右远端和短胃血管,结扎之初,流向胃底的血流量下降了73%。试验结果显示,在切除时预处理组新形成胃管内的血流量比对照组高出三倍且未出现吻合口瘘的情况,而对照组小鼠则有两例因吻合口瘘致死 [12]。根据上述研究,Holscher将这一理念应用于83例患者,并取得了同样的效果 [13]。另外,Enesvedt等人利用血管内皮生长因子(VEGF)的质粒传递进行了研究。在小鼠行食管胃吻合术后,立刻将VEGF165注射到最易发生瘘的胃底,与对照组相比,在其组织中发现新血管形成,血流量和吻合强度显著增加 [14]。因此,VEGF基因疗法具有降低吻合口瘘发病率潜力。

Fjederholt等人对557例接受胃食管连接部癌手术的患者进行了研究,发现非甾体抗炎药与术后吻合口瘘密切相关 [15]。就像Klein [16] 和Gorissen [17] 等人针对结直肠癌手术患者的研究,使用非甾体抗炎药组比对照组更可能出现AL。这或许与NSAIDs对白细胞功能、内皮生长因子抑制和影响血管生成有关。

有一项实验证明,全身性心血管疾病是吻合口瘘风险的有力指标 [18],特别是冠状动脉和主动脉钙化。这些钙化可能是弥漫性动脉疾病的诱发因素或后果,有助于筛选出吻合口瘘的高风险患者 [19]。Alicia等人通过CT广泛测量了406位入组患者的心血管特征,得出结论:不仅局部血管疾病,全身性血管疾病也能够提示食管切除术后发生吻合口瘘的高风险 [20]。

糖尿病在临床上被认为是延迟伤口愈合和外科感染并发症的一个独立危险因素,Onodera等人发现糖尿病大鼠结肠吻合口愈合延迟,同时有证据表明吻合口强度显著减弱 [21] [22]。Akihiko Okamura等人比较了HbA1c水平与AL的发病率,223名(74.3%)患者的HbA1c为6.0%,50名(16.7%)患者的HbA1c为6.0%~6.4%,27名(9.0%)患者的HbA1c为C6.5%,相应的AL发生率分别为9.6%、12.0%和29.6%。糖化血红蛋白 ≥ 6.5%患者的AL发生率显著高于其他两组(p = 0.014) [23]。可见术前糖化血红蛋白水平与术后AL的发生密切相关,但仍需要进一步的前瞻性干预研究来评估。

4. 诊断方法

4.1. 临床症状及实验室检查

AL的临床表现从无症状到暴发性败血症不等。很多因素都能够影响AL的临床表现,比如吻合口的位置、缺损的大小以及渗瘘出的液体量等。早期瘘临床症状包括持续发热和剧烈胸痛,然而,有时AL的第一个迹象只是心动过速,通常以房颤的形式出现 [24]。中晚期的吻合口瘘可出现局部压痛、皮下气肿,严重者甚至出现纵隔脓肿、胸膜肺气肿、胸腔内病灶脓毒症和气管食管瘘等。

除了临床症状外,有些检查也可以提示AL的发生。无论是在颈部还是胸腔内吻合,CRP、PCT、WBC和PN的水平均与AL的发生有关,其中C反应蛋白似乎是最有价值的检查 [25]。术后第3天的CRP值约为17 mg/dL,现已被确定为AL发展的重要诊断临界值。此外,引流液淀粉酶水平的测量是另一个有用的早期诊断工具,其临界值为125到250 ui/L [26] [27]。

4.2. 影像学检查

目前来说,术后食管造影常被用做检测AL和评估新食管功能。然而,在无临床症状的情况下,食管造影对AL的敏感性较低 [28]。2014年,Cools-Lartigue等人得出结论:钡剂食管造影术对有效筛查al不够敏感,食管癌术后AL的理想检测方法仍有待建立。因此Yoshiaki等人研究了一种新的方法——气泡征,短轴上大于2 mm的空气密度被定义为气泡并用CT来计数 [29]。通常情况下,术后诊断AL的平均时间是9.4天,引入“气泡征”的概念后,这一时间提前至5.4天。另外,在Yoshiaki等人的实验中,在22位发生AL的患者中有11位食管造影没有发现任何异常,然而术后CT图像中可以观察到气泡征阳性。术后CT可以作为一种筛查手段,通过观察“气泡”数量,以最大可能的减少并发症,缩短住院时间。

4.3. 内镜检查

内镜是一种安全、有效的方法,可以同时进行AL的诊断和治疗。Richard等人的研究证明内镜检查导致操作腔内压力增高,不是造成吻合口破裂的风险因素 [30]。最重要的是内镜检查诊断AL的特异性和敏感性可以达到近95% [31]。内镜检查除了可以更加直观的观察胃管的状态外,还能避免口服造影剂对瘘口的影响。

总之,每一种诊断方法都有自己的优缺点,究竟哪项检查能使患者收益最大化,应该由临床大夫综合考虑后决定。现阶段通常将胸部CT作为一级检查,内镜作为第二级检查以明确CT不能诊断的吻合口瘘,并同时采取一定的治疗手段。

5. 预防及治疗

对于无症状或轻微症状的颈胸部AL,可以采用保守治疗和全身治疗策略。通常包括:广谱抗生素治疗(根据感染指标)、抗胆碱药物(减少唾液)、抗酸药物(PPI)和促动力药物(减少AL体积)等。

胃管缺血是吻合口瘘的主要原因之一,因此建立术中组织血流量测量系统,可为食管切除术中选择合适的吻合口位置提供参考。Ozawa等人的研究表面ICG荧光,不仅可以有效地实时显示胃管的微灌注,还可以预测发生AL的风险 [32]。ICG近红外荧光成像技术是一种用于可视化血液循环和淋巴循环的新型光学技术,在各个外科领域都有着广泛的应用,其长期安全性已得到证实。

AL管理策略的基本原则是封闭或覆盖吻合口缺损、控制渗瘘和引流。到目前为止,有自膨式金属支架(sems)、endoclips、超范围夹持器(OTSCs)、组织胶和缝合装置已被单独或各种组合方式用于吻合口瘘的初步修复。覆膜支架可以有效封闭瘘口,防止食物等通过瘘口引起胸腔及肺部感染;减少胃酸对瘘口的刺激,防止瘘口进一步扩大 [33] [34]。放置自膨式覆膜支架现已成为治疗食管瘘的首选保守治疗方法 [35]。早在2006年Peters等人就分享过3例通过自膨式覆膜金属或塑料支架治疗并取得良好疗效的案例 [36]。使用自膨式金属或塑料支架来治疗食管癌术后吻合口瘘兼顾微创和有效,特别是对于严重基础病或并发症的重症患者更可以总中获益。Peters表示,食管支架的放置可能会增加脓肿、积液排出的难度,所以支架的使用应当与外科手术、CT引导下引流等手段配合使用。这与其他一些学者的观点不谋而合,值得注意的是出血、移位、穿孔的风险仍然存在 [37]。

瑞金医院陈学瑜等人通过纤维蛋白粘合剂治疗了7例食管癌术后胸内吻合口瘘的患者,认为此法能有效封闭瘘口,减少渗出,减轻患者全身炎症反应 [38]。纤维蛋白胶治疗的主要成分是纤维蛋白原、凝血酶和稳定剂,它可以附着于创面起到封闭的作用。对于小瘘口使用蛋白胶封堵易操作、费用低、创伤小且安全有效。

来自美国德克萨斯贝勒大学的Leeds博士等介绍了一项治疗消化道吻合口瘘的新技术:腔内真空治疗(EVAC) [39]。腔内真空治疗被认为是直肠手术后吻合口瘘的一种非常有效的技术,该技术的优势在于其微乎其微的创伤,既不需要手术切口或操作,也无需放置引流管。它是将具有负压的真空装置插入自然腔道,如口腔或肛门,来控制污染物的扩散,可以通过刺激肉芽组织的生长来加速伤口的闭合,并且不会影响瘘口的二期愈合 [40] [41]。EVAC技术起源于欧洲,2008年腔内真空聚氨酯海绵装置首次成功应用于上消化道内镜。聚氨酯海绵具有良好的真空引流效果,这项新技术的应用为保守治疗提供了更多选择。Laukoetter等人,报道了52例全因食管缺损经EVAC治疗成功的49例(94.2%),39例成功的食管切除术或胃切除术后吻合口瘘的36例(92.3%) [42]。2013年,Brangewitz等证实EVAC技术因其更高的闭合率、更短的治疗周期和更低的死亡率,在治疗食管瘘方面优于自彭式金属支架 [43]。Ahrens等人认为放置腔内聚氨酯海绵和腔内真空将是治疗严重症状渗瘘的首选内镜治疗方法 [44]。

吻合口瘘发生早期(<72 h)一般需进行手术治疗,因为这多半是由于手术问题,且这些渗瘘不易控制。此外,对保守治疗和内镜下治疗失败的患者也应行手术修补。脓胸、脓毒血症、胃管坏死等特别严重或危及生命的情况下开放性的外科探查也十分必要。通过外科手术来修复组织缺损和重建可能需要使用带蒂的皮瓣来加强吻合,常用的包括带蒂胸膜、心包、网膜、肋间肌瓣、胸锁乳突肌和胸大肌瓣。值得注意的是大网膜在炎症的定位及胃肠道穿孔等方面有着独特作用,这是因为网膜组织内含有吞噬细胞,有着强大的防御功能,通过网膜内吞噬细胞的吞噬作用控制感染保护吻合口。同时,带蒂大网膜可以通过血管生成因子增加侧支血流量并诱导新生血管形成。这种在无血管区域诱导新生血管的能力以及在感染存在的情况下发挥功能的能力,使其成为防止食管胃吻合口瘘的独特结构 [45]。

6. 小结

食管癌术后吻合口瘘严重影响着患者的治疗质量和生命安全,外科医师应当重视该并发症的预防及治疗,对于高危患者应事先采取预防措施;对于怀疑吻合口瘘的患者,应当早发现、早治疗。AL的临床症状和严重程度多种多样,再加上种类繁多的诊断和治疗技术,使得目前AL的临床治疗仍是基于个体化的治疗方法。与过去相比,AL治疗向更保守的治疗方式转变,同时内镜(主要是EVAC)扮演着更为重要的角色。

参考文献

[1] Bray, F., et al. (2018) Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 68, 394-424.
https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492
[2] 赫捷, 邵康. 中国食管癌流行病学现状、诊疗现状及未来对策[J]. 中国癌症杂志, 2011, 21(7): 501-504.
[3] Blencowe, N.S., et al. (2012) Reporting of Short-Term Clinical Outcomes after Esophagectomy: A Systematic Review. Annals of Surgery, 255, 658-666.
https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182480a6a
[4] van Workum, F., et al. (2017) Improved Functional Results after Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Intrathoracic versus Cervical Anastomosis. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 103, 267-273.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.07.010
[5] Mao, T., et al. (2015) Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes between Open and Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer. Thoracic Cancer, 6, 303-306.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.12184
[6] van Workum, F., van den Wildenberg, F.J.H., Polat, F., de Wilt, J.H.W. and Rosman, C. (2014) Minimally Invasive Oesophagectomy: Preliminary Results after Introduction of an Intrathoracic Anastomosis. Digestive Surgery, 31, 95-103.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000358812
[7] Zhou, C., et al. (2015) Superiority of Minimally Invasive Oesophagectomy in Reducing In-Hospital Mortality of Patients with Resectable Oesophageal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. PLoS ONE, 10, e0132889.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132889
[8] Ikeda, Y., et al. (2001) Clinical Significance of Tissue Blood Flow during Esophagectomy by Laser Doppler Flowmetry. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 122, 1101-1106.
https://doi.org/10.1067/mtc.2001.117835
[9] Akiyama, S., et al. (1998) Preoperative Embolization Therapy for Esophageal Operation. Journal of Surgical Oncology, 69, 219-223.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9098(199812)69:4<219::AID-JSO5>3.0.CO;2-7
[10] Nagawa, H., et al. (1997) Microvascular Anastomosis for Additional Blood Flow in Reconstruction after Intrathoracic Esophageal Carcinoma Surgery. The American Journal of Surgery, 173, 131-133.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9610(96)00410-2
[11] Murakami, M., et al. (2000) Revascularization Using the Short Gastric Vessels of the Gastric Tube after Subtotal Esophagectomy for Intrathoracic Esophageal Carcinoma. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 190, 71-77.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1072-7515(99)00234-3
[12] Reavis, K.M., Chang, E.Y., Hunter, J.G. and Jobe, B.A. (2005) Utilization of the Delay Phenomenon Improves Blood Flow and Reduces Collagen Deposition in Esophagogastric Anastomoses. Annals of Surgery, 241, 736-745.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000160704.50657.32
[13] Holscher, A.H., et al. (2007) Laparoscopic Ischemic Conditioning of the Stomach for Esophageal Replacement. Annals of Surgery, 245, 241-246.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000245847.40779.10
[14] Kristian, E., et al. (2008) 952 VEGF Gene Therapy Improves Anastomotic Healing in the Gastrointestinal Tract: Applications in Esophageal Surgery. Gastroenterology, 134, A-856.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5085(08)64010-X
[15] Fjederholt, K.T., et al. (2018) Ketorolac and Other NSAIDs Increase the Risk of Anastomotic Leakage after Surgery for GEJ Cancers: A Cohort Study of 557 Patients. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 22, 587-594.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-017-3623-7
[16] Klein, M., Gogenur, I. and Rosenberg, J. (2012) Postoperative Use of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Patients with Anastomotic Leakage Requiring Reoperation after Colorectal Resection: Cohort Study Based on Prospective Data. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 345, e6166.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e6166
[17] Gorissen, K.J., et al. (2012) Risk of Anastomotic Leakage with Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Colorectal Surgery. British Journal of Surgery, 99, 721-727.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.8691
[18] Borggreve, A.S., et al. (2018) Generalized Cardiovascular Disease on a Preoperative CT Scan Is Predictive for Anastomotic Leakage after Esophagectomy. European Journal of Surgical Oncology, 44, 587-593.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2018.01.225
[19] Goense, L., et al. (2016) Aortic Calcification Increases the Risk of Anastomotic Leakage after Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 102, 247-252.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.01.093
[20] van Rossum, P., et al. (2015) Calcification of Arteries Supplying the Gastric Tube: A New Risk Factor for Anastomotic Leakage after Esophageal Surgery. Radiology, 274, 124-132.
https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14140410
[21] Trick, W.E., et al. (2000) Modifiable Risk Factors Associated with Deep Sternal Site Infection after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 119, 108-114.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5223(00)70224-8
[22] Onodera, H., Ikeuchi, D., Nagayama, S. and Imamura, M. (2004) Weakness of Anastomotic Site in Diabetic Rats Is Caused by Changes in the Integrity of Newly Formed Collagen. Digestive Surgery, 21, 146-151.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000078381
[23] Okamura, A., et al. (2017) Preoperative Glycosylated Hemoglobin Levels Predict Anastomotic Leak after Esophagectomy with Cervical Esophagogastric Anastomosis. World Journal of Surgery, 41, 200-207.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3763-z
[24] Stippel, D.L., Taylan, C., Schröder, W., Beckurts, K.T.E. and Hölscher, A.H. (2005) Supraventricular Tachyarrhythmia as Early Indicator of a Complicated Course after Esophagectomy. Diseases of the Esophagus, 18, 267-273.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2050.2005.00487.x
[25] Asti, E., et al. (2018) Utility of C-Reactive Protein as Predictive Biomarker of Anastomotic Leak after Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy. Langenbeck’s Archives of Surgery, 403, 235-244.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-018-1663-4
[26] Miller, D.L., Helms, G.A. and Mayfield, W.R. (2018) Evaluation of Esophageal Anastomotic Integrity with Serial Pleural Amylase Levels. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 105, 200-206.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.07.053
[27] Jiang, B., et al. (2018) Decision Analysis Supports the Use of Drain Amylase-Based Enhanced Recovery Method after Esophagectomy. Diseases of the Esophagus: Official Journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, 31, doy041.
https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doy041
[28] Solomon, D.G., Sasaki, C.T. and Salem, R.R. (2012) An Evaluation of the Routine Use of Contrast Radiography as a Screening Test for Cervical Anastomotic Integrity after Esophagectomy. The American Journal of Surgery, 203, 467-471.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.04.005
[29] Shoji, Y., et al. (2018) Air Bubble Sign: A New Screening Method for Anastomotic Leakage after Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 25, 1061-1068.
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-6327-z
[30] Page, R.D., et al. (2013) Routine Endoscopy to Detect Anastomotic Leakage after Esophagectomy. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 95, 292-298.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.09.048
[31] Hogan, B.A., Winter, D., Broe, D., Broe, P. and Lee, M.J. (2008) Prospective Trial Comparing Contrast Swallow, Computed Tomography and Endoscopy to Identify Anastomotic Leak Following Oesophagogastric Surgery. Surgical Endoscopy, 22, 767-771.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9629-6
[32] Koyanagi, K., et al. (2016) Blood Flow Speed of the Gastric Conduit Assessed by Indocyanine Green Fluorescence: New Predictive Evaluation of Anastomotic Leakage after Esophagectomy. Medicine (Baltimore), 95, e4386.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000004386
[33] Doniec, J.M., Schniewind, B., Kahlke, V., Kremer, B. and Grimm, H. (2003) Therapy of Anastomotic Leaks by Means of Covered Self-Expanding Metallic Stents after Esophagogastrectomy. Endoscopy, 35, 652-658.
https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2003-41509
[34] Tuebergen, D., et al. (2008) Treatment of Thoracic Esophageal Anastomotic Leaks and Esophageal Perforations with Endoluminal Stents: Efficacy and Current Limitations. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 12, 1168-1176.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-008-0500-4
[35] Salminen, P., Gullichsen, R. and Laine, S. (2009) Use of Self-Expandable Metal Stents for the Treatment of Esophageal Perforations and Anastomotic Leaks. Surgical Endoscopy, 23, 1526-1530.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0432-4
[36] Peters, J.H., et al. (2006) Self-Expanding Metal Stents for the Treatment of Intrathoracic Esophageal Anastomotic Leaks Following Esophagectomy. The American Journal of Gastroenterology, 101, 1393-1395.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00615.x
[37] Hunerbein, M., et al. (2004) Treatment of Thoracic Anastomotic Leaks after Esophagectomy with Self-Expanding Plastic Stents. Annals of Surgery, 240, 801-807.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000143122.76666.ae
[38] 陈学瑜, 袁晓琴, 陈中元. 经内镜下注射人纤维蛋白粘合剂治疗7例食管癌术后胸内吻合口瘘临床研究[J]. 癌症进展, 2015, 13(6): 658-660+664.
[39] Leeds, S.G. and Burdick, J.S. (2016) Management of Gastric Leaks after Sleeve Gastrectomy with Endoluminal Vacuum (E-Vac) Therapy. Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases, 12, 1278-1285.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2016.01.017
[40] Mees, S.T., et al. (2008) Endo-Vacuum Assisted Closure Treatment for Rectal Anastomotic Insufficiency. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, 51, 404-410.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-007-9141-z
[41] Morykwas, M.J., et al. (2006) Vacuum-Assisted Closure: State of Basic Research and Physiologic Foundation. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 117, 121S-126S.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000225450.12593.12
[42] Laukoetter, M.G., et al. (2017) Successful Closure of Defects in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract by Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy (EVT): A Prospective Cohort Study. Surgical Endoscopy, 31, 2687-2696.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5265-3
[43] Brangewitz, M., et al. (2013) Endoscopic Closure of Esophageal Intrathoracic Leaks: Stent versus Endoscopic Vacuum-Assisted Closure, a Retrospective Analysis. Endoscopy, 45, 433-438.
https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1326435
[44] Ahrens, M., et al. (2010) Drainage of Esophageal Leakage Using Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy: A Prospective Pilot Study. Endoscopy, 42, 693-698.
https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1255688
[45] Fekete, F., Breil, P.H., Ronsse, H., Tossen, J.C. and Langonnet, F. (1981) EEA Stapler and Omental Graft in Esophagogastrectomy: Experience with 30 Intrathoracic Anastomoses for Cancer. Annals of Surgery, 193, 825-830.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-198106000-00019