Definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) has become a cornerstone in the treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer; however, local control remains suboptimal, and persistent lesions or locoregional recurrences after treatment are not uncommon. For patients without distant metastases but with local failure, whether surgical intervention can still offer curative potential remains a major clinical dilemma. Salvage esophagectomy (SE) offers potential long-term survival for selected patients, but this procedure is performed in the context of severe fibrosis, impaired local blood supply, and obscured anatomical planes following chemoradiotherapy, resulting in significantly higher perioperative risk compared to primary esophagectomy. Consequently, controversies exist regarding patient selection, preoperative restaging, choice of surgical approach, extent of lymphadenectomy, gastrointestinal reconstruction, and perioperative management. In recent years, with the refinement of restaging modalities such as PET/CT, the accumulation of experience in high-volume centers, and emerging evidence from clinical studies, the clinical role of SE has gradually shifted from a "high-risk salvage measure" to a "selective curative strategy aimed at achieving long-term survival in carefully selected patients". Nevertheless, standardized guidelines for patient selection, technical approaches, and perioperative management are still lacking. Based on current evidence and clinical experience, experts organized by the Integrated Esophageal Cancer Committee of Chinese Anti-Cancer Association systematically reviewed key issues regarding SE, including its definition, indications, preoperative evaluation, choice of surgical approach, lymphadenectomy, gastrointestinal reconstruction, and perioperative management, and formulated a Chinese expert consensus. This consensus aims to provide guidance for standardized assessment, appropriate referral, individualized surgical decision-making, and optimized perioperative management of patients with locoregional failure after dCRT. Ultimately, this will increase the likelihood of R0 resection, reduce the risk of severe complications, and promote the safer, more judicious, and standardized implementation of SE in high-risk scenarios.
Objective Jejunal interposition is an important option for restoring gastrointestinal continuity in patients with complex esophageal cancer in whom the stomach is unavailable for reconstruction due to previous gastrectomy, tumor involvement, failed gastric conduit, or other constraints. Although the jejunum offers a caliber similar to the esophagus, a rich blood supply, and preserved peristaltic function, anatomical variations in mesenteric length and vascular arcades render long-segment and high-level reconstruction susceptible to excessive tension, mesenteric torsion, venous congestion, and inadequate distal perfusion. This consensus aims to provide standardized recommendations for the application of jejunal interposition in this specific patient population. Methods This consensus was developed in accordance with the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development and Chinese national guideline development standards, with reference to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation Ⅱ(AGREE Ⅱ), Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT), and Scientific, Transparent and Applicable Rankings (STAR) checklists. The project was registered on the international practice guidelines registry platform (PREPARE-2026CN1384). The working group systematically searched Chinese and English evidence addressing 12 clinical questions. Evidence was graded using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) 2009 system, with structured appraisal of risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision. Recommendations were formulated through two rounds of Delphi surveys and a face-to-face consensus meeting, with an agreement threshold of ≥75%. Results The consensus generated 12 recommendations covering indications, selection between jejunum and colon, preoperative assessment, surgical approach and reconstruction route, pedicled jejunal interposition (PJI), supercharged pedicled jejunal interposition (SPJ), indocyanine green (ICG) perfusion assessment, perioperative nutrition, management of anastomotic leakage, long-term follow-up, and special treatment scenarios. Given that the available direct evidence is predominantly derived from single-center retrospective cohorts and case series, recommendations extrapolated from general esophagectomy or other gastrointestinal surgical evidence are deliberately phrased with caution. Conclusion Jejunal interposition is a safe and effective approach for digestive tract reconstruction in patients with complex esophageal cancer in whom the stomach is unavailable. This consensus emphasizes that clinical decision-making should be individualized based on the patient's prior treatment history, reconstruction height, vascular anatomy, technical availability, and institutional experience in the Chinese context.