Evidence Hub

Microbial Pathogen Spectrum in Anastomotic Leaks after Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy

Schneider A, Chon SH, Kasper P, Wetsch WA, Bruns CJ, Hohn A

Surgical infections, 2025

513 participants

Abstract

Background: Anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy cause significant morbidity and mortality. In addition to their early detection and prompt endoscopic or surgical management, providing adequate antimicrobial agents is a fundamental aspect of therapy. In this study, different types of microbiological samples were analyzed to provide insight into the microbial pathogen spectrum of anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients who developed anastomotic leak after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy at a German high-volume center between 2016 and 2018. Results of microbiological cultures from surgical samples, chest tube fluid, endoscopic aspirates, and blood cultures were analyzed to determine species and antimicrobial susceptibility. Results: Out of 513 consecutive patients undergoing esophagectomy, 74 developed an anastomotic leak. About 88%-100% of positive samples showed growth of gram-positive bacteria, mainly viridians streptococci but also enterococci. Gram-negative bacteria were found in 48%-82% of positive samples, mainly enterobacterales. Yeasts were found in 43%-64%. The prevalance of multidrug-resistant bacteria was low in our patient population. Expected failure of empiric antibiotic treatment was <10% for piperacillin-tazobactam, meropenem, and tigecycline (each combined with an echinocandin) but not for ampicillin-sulbactam, ceftriaxone plus metronidazole, moxifloxacin, or gentamicine plus clindamycin. Conclusions: There is a broad…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 513 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

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