RESUMEN
PURPOSE: In treating carcinoma of the esophagus, a gastric drainage procedure seems to be necessary with esophago gastrostomies because of the inevitable incidental bilateral truncal vagotomy which occurs during the esophagectomy. There are potential hazards with a pyloroplasty such as jeopardizing the blood supply to the mobilized stmach, shortening its length for substitution, leakage, dumping syndrome, and bile reflux gastritis. The aims of the study are to compare the postoperative outcome of patients with and without pyloroplasty after an esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, and to evaluate the necessity of pyloroplasty in the vagotomized intrathoracic stomach after esophageal surgery. METHODS: During the years 1996 to 2001, 23 patients with carcinoma of the esophagus underwent an esophagectomy followed by esophagogastrostomy with or without pyloroplasty. The medical records of the patients were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: There were no statiscally significant differences between the pyloroplasty group and the no-pyloroplasty group with regards to the average hospital stay, resumption of oral feeding, removal of the nasogastric tube, and the daily gastric drainage. CONCLUSION: Postoperative symptomatic evaluation of patients who had esophageal cancer and underwent an esoph-agectomy and an esophagogastrostomy, with or without pyloroplasty supports the concept that the drainage procedure is unnecessary in the gastric replacement of the esophagus.