4.3 Article

Developing a new predictive index for anastomotic leak following the anastomosis of esophageal atresia: preliminary results from a single centre

Journal

JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC SURGERY
Volume 17, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13019-022-01878-8

Keywords

Esophageal atresia; Anastomotic leak; Atresia gap length; Birth weight

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to determine the predictive factors for anastomotic leak after esophageal atresia anastomosis. Analysis of clinical data from 74 children with esophageal atresia revealed that birth weight and gap length were risk factors for anastomotic leak. Furthermore, the ratio of gap length to birth weight was found to be a helpful predictive index for anastomotic leak following the anastomosis of esophageal atresia.
Background The aim of this study was to determine a predictive index for the risk of anastomotic leak following esophageal atresia anastomosis, Methods This article reviewed the clinical data of 74 children with esophageal atresia in Fujian Children's hospital. The risk factors for anastomotic leak were analysed, and a new predictive index was proposed. Results The incidence of anastomotic leak was 29.7% after anastomosis in 74 children with esophageal atresia. Birth weight and gap length were risk factors for anastomotic leak. Logistic regression analysis showed that birth weight (Wald 2 = 4.528, P = 0.033, OR = 0.273) was a protective factor for anastomotic leak, whereas gap length (Wald 2 = 7.057, P = 0.008, OR = 2.388) was a risk factor for anastomotic leak. The ratio of gap length to birth weight had a positive predictive effect on the occurrence of anastomotic leak (AUC = 0.732, P = 0.002). Conclusion Birth weight and gap length are important predictors of anastomotic leak in esophageal atresia. Measurement of the ratio of gap length to birth weight is a helpful predictive index for anastomotic leak following the anastomosis of esophageal atresia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available