Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Treatment of long-gap esophageal atresia (LEA) is a major challenge. Options for reconstruction include native esophagus, or replacement with stomach, colon, or small intestine. However, debate continues regarding the optimal conduit for esophageal replacement. METHODS: Medical records of patients with a diagnosis of esophageal atresia during a 20-year period were reviewed. RESULTS: Twenty-eight cases of LEA were identified. Ten patients underwent primary anastomosis either after serial pouch dilations (9/10) and/or after a lengthening procedure (2/10). Nine received colonic interpositions, and the remainder were reconstructed with a gastric tube (n = 3), or gastric interposition (n = 2). One patient died prior to repair, and two await definitive treatment. Repeat esophageal reconstruction was required in four patients because of conduit ischemia. Two ischemic events occurred in the colonic interposition group, and two in the native esophageal repairs. All patients, except one who relocated, received long-term follow-up (mean 4.2 years: range 0.5-11.5 years). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeon's expertise and patient's anatomy should be considered when selecting an appropriate operation for LEA. Although native esophagus is generally preferred, it is associated with a high rate of stricture. Although our study has a limited by numbers, we found that patients with gastric conduits had lower complication rates and no conduit ischemia. We suggest that gastric transposition may be favored as an initial reconstructive option.