Yurtcu, MuslimToy, HaticeArbag, HamdiCaglayan, Osman2020-03-262020-03-2620120165-58761872-8464https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2011.10.012https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12395/28445Objective: The aim of the study was to compare surgical management with or without a nasogastric tube (NGT) to prevent anastomotic stricture that occurred following esophageal repairs (ERs). Methods: Twelve New Zealand rabbits were divided equally into 2 m: with a NGT (experimental group) and without a NGT (control group). A 1-cm-length of the cervical esophagus was resected through a cervical incision and then anastomosis was performed using the NGT and keeping it in place for 6 days in the experimental group. The same procedures were performed in the control group. Both groups were fed parenterally for 6 days and orally after esophagography on postoperative day 7 as long as there was no esophageal leakage. The rabbits were sacrificed to evaluate diameter of the esophageal lumen (DOTEL), bursting pressure (BP), tissue hydroxyproline (HP) and wound healing scores (WHSs) in the anastomosis lines 8 weeks later. Results: In the experimental group, DOTEL, BP, and HP were significantly lower than they were in the control group. WHSs in the experimental group were not higher than they were in the control group. Conclusions: Surgical management without a NGT is more effective than management with a NGT in ERs as shown by increased DOTEL, BP, and HP levels. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.en10.1016/j.ijporl.2011.10.012info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessNasogastric tubeEsophageal repairsArticle76110410622075132Q2WOS:000301008000022Q2