Menu
Recruiting NCT05954702

Supercharged TRAM Evaluation in Cervical Esophagogastroplasty After Esophagectomy

No phase Interventional Esophagus Cancer Carcinoma Esophagus

For patients and families

In plain language

An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.

What is being studied
The protocol lists: Supercharged TRAM esophagectomy, Conventional Esophagectomy.
Who it may be relevant to
Registry conditions: Esophagus Cancer, Carcinoma Esophagus. Basic parameters: from 18 years · All.
What needs checking
Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
Where it takes place
Brazil
Next step
Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →

Overview

Esophagectomy has high rates of morbidity and mortality, in many cases due to esophagus reconstruction. Anastomotic leakage and fistula are the main esophagectomy complications. Many studies underwent to investigate the cause for anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy, however none of them conclude it is related to surgery or suture technique. However, it seems to be triggered by the ischemia caused after stomach mobilization to esophagus reconstruction, or even tension in the anastomosis. Considering the post esophagectomy with gastroplasty high morbidity and mortality rates, strategies to create a new vascularization source and decrease anastomotic leakage rates is important. In this study researchers will evaluate whether a TRAM flap transfer supercharged is effective on decrease morbidity related to anastomosis ischemia in patients undergoing esophagectomy.

Detailed description

The transfer of muscle parts is one of the main reconstruction techniques used in plastic surgery. Transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap transfers are very considered due to high quality results, wide application in many cases, and small number of reviews in long term.

Beegle, in 1991 published a new technique of using TRAM supercharged in which microsurgical anastomosis are used between TRAM's unipedicled gastroepiploic deep artery and veins and thoracic branches and vessels, such as axillary and thoracodorsal vessels.

Looking for recover tissue blood perfusion and decrease morbidity rates associated with anastomosis ischemia, some studies showed large intestine or jejunum interposition plus an additional blood supply through venous and arterial anastomosis - colon or jejunum supercharged is effective. The isoperistaltic supercharged colon interposition was a good option to rebuild big esophagus parts in which stomach was not available.

Considering the post esophagectomy with gastroplasty high morbidity and mortality rates, strategies to create a new vascularization source and decrease anastomotic leakage rates is important. This is a single-institution, randomized clinical trial with participants recruited in the digestive system surgery clinic, at the Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP). Patients will be randomized to conventional esophagectomy or TRAM supercharged esophagectomy, and researchers will evaluate post-operatory complications in both groups.

Interventions

  • Procedure Supercharged TRAM esophagectomy
    Esophagectomy, immediately followed by supercharged esophagogastroplasty. Use the transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap transfers to surgically create a new anastomosis in the left gastroepiploic vessels.
  • Procedure Conventional Esophagectomy
    Esophagectomy, immediately followed by an esophagus reconstruction trough esophagogastroplasty.

Primary outcome measures

  • Presence and number of post-operatory complications [Time frame: Until 1 year after Surgery]
  • Mortality [Time frame: Until 1 year after surgery after surgery]
Secondary outcome measures (5)
  • Days in intensive care unit [Time frame: From the surgery day until the date patient leave intensive care unit]
  • Hospitalization period [Time frame: From the surgery day until the date patient leave hospital]
  • Need of vasoactive drugs [Time frame: From the surgery day until the date patient leave hospital]
  • Blood transfusion need [Time frame: From the surgery day until the date patient leave hospital]
  • Drain use time [Time frame: From the surgery day until the date patient took off drain]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • Diagnosis of esophageal malignancy cancer;
  • Ability to understand and collaborate during treatment;

Exclusion criteria

  • Previous gastrectomy;
  • Previous abdominal surgery with risk of altering stomach vascularization;
  • Previous head and neck surgery with risk of alteration of cervical vessels.

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: No

Study design

Allocation
Randomized
Model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Open label
Primary purpose
Treatment

Study locations

Brazil · 1 center
  • Instituto do Cancer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP) — São Paulo

Publications

  • Akiyama H. Surgery for carcinoma of the esophagus. Curr Probl Surg. 1980 Feb;17(2):53-120. doi: 10.1016/s0011-3840(80)80025-6. No abstract available. PMID 6987040
  • Akiyama H, Miyazono H, Tsurumaru M, Hashimoto C, Kawamura T. Use of the stomach as an esophageal substitute. Ann Surg. 1978 Nov;188(5):606-10. doi: 10.1097/00000658-197811000-00004. PMID 718285
  • Barzin A, Norton JA, Whyte R, Lee GK. Supercharged jejunum flap for total esophageal reconstruction: single-surgeon 3-year experience and outcomes analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Jan;127(1):173-180. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181f95a36. PMID 21200211
  • Bourke MJ, Hope RL, Chu G, Gillespie PE, Bull C, O'Rourke I, Williams SJ. Laser palliation of inoperable malignant dysphagia: initial and at death. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996 Jan;43(1):29-32. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(96)70256-0. PMID 8903814
  • Briel JW, Tamhankar AP, Hagen JA, DeMeester SR, Johansson J, Choustoulakis E, Peters JH, Bremner CG, DeMeester TR. Prevalence and risk factors for ischemia, leak, and stricture of esophageal anastomosis: gastric pull-up versus colon interposition. J Am Coll Surg. 2004 Apr;198(4):536-41; discussion 541-2. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2003.11.026. PMID 15051003
  • Buskens CJ, Hulscher JB, Fockens P, Obertop H, van Lanschot JJ. Benign tracheo-neo-esophageal fistulas after subtotal esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001 Jul;72(1):221-4. doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(01)02701-1. PMID 11465183
  • Collard JM, Tinton N, Malaise J, Romagnoli R, Otte JB, Kestens PJ. Esophageal replacement: gastric tube or whole stomach? Ann Thorac Surg. 1995 Aug;60(2):261-6; discussion 267. doi: 10.1016/0003-4975(95)00411-d. PMID 7646084
  • D'Amico TA, Harpole DH Jr. Molecular biology of esophageal cancer. Chest Surg Clin N Am. 2000 Aug;10(3):451-69. PMID 10967750

Identifiers

NCT: NCT05954702 · NP 1683

Primary sources (government registries)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗