Evidence Hub

Defect Size-Based Comparative Analysis of Treatment Modalities for Esophagojejunal Anastomotic Leakage Following Gastrectomy

B. Seong, J. Ahn, J. Yoo, C. Ko, Sa-Hong Min, C. Gong, B. Kim, M. Yoo et al.

Journal of Gastric Cancer, 2026

100 participants

Abstract

Purpose Esophagojejunal anastomotic leakage (EJAL) represents a severe postoperative complication following total or proximal gastrectomy. Treatment strategies include conservative management, endoscopic interventions, and surgery; however, comparative data remain limited. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes of different strategies to identify the optimal approach based on anastomotic defect size. Materials and Methods This retrospective study reviewed 100 patients diagnosed with EJAL between January 2015 and October 2024. Patients were categorized into four groups: conservative management, endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure (E-VAC), other endoscopic treatments, and surgery. The primary outcomes were leakage duration and length of hospital stay after EJAL diagnosis, whereas the secondary outcome was time to C-reactive protein normalization. Subgroup analyses were performed according to defect size. Results Among the 100 patients, 76 were male and 24 were female, with a mean age of 65.7 years. Conservative treatment was the most common modality (53%), followed by other endoscopic treatments (19%), E-VAC (14%), and surgery (14%). In patients with a defect size <1 cm, conservative treatment was associated with significantly shorter leakage duration (P=0.035) and earlier resumption of diet (P=0.029) compared with endoscopic treatment. Among those with defects ≥2 cm, E-VAC demonstrated the most favorable median outcomes across all variables; however, statistical…

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free