Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy in the Management of Postoperative Leakage After Esophagectomy

The Optimal Treatment Strategy for Postoperative Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy: a Comparative Analysis Between Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy and Conventional Treatment

BACKGROUND

We compared the clinical outcomes between endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) and conventional treatment (CT) for the management of post-esophagectomy anastomotic leakage.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the medical records of patients who underwent esophagectomy with esophagogastrostomy from November 2003 to August 2021 was conducted. Thirty-four patients who developed anastomotic leakage were analyzed according to whether they underwent CT (n = 13) or EVT (n = 21).

RESULTS

The median time to complete healing was significantly shorter in the EVT group than in the CT group (16 [4-142] days vs. 70 [8-604] days; p = 0.011). The rate of clinical success was higher in the EVT group (90.5%) than in the CT group (66.7%, p = 0.159). A subgroup analysis showed more favorable outcomes for EVT in patients with thoracic leakage, including a higher clinical success rate (p = 0.037), more rapid complete healing (p = 0.004), and shorter hospital stays (p = 0.006). However, the results were not significantly different in patients with cervical leakage. Anastomotic strictures occurred in 3 EVT patients (14.3%) and 5 CT patients (50.0%) (p = 0.044), and the EVT group showed a trend towards improved freedom from anastomotic strictures (p = 0.105).

CONCLUSIONS

EVT could be considered as an adequate treatment option for post-esophagectomy anastomotic leakage. EVT might have better clinical outcomes compared to CT for managing anastomotic leakage after transthoracic esophagogastrostomy, and further studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of EVT in patients who undergo cervical esophagogastrostomy.

Don't be afraid of black holes: Vacuum sponge and vacuum stent treatment of leaks in the upper GI tract-a case series and mini-review

The treatment of leaks in the upper gastrointestinal tract has been revolutionized by the advent of covered self-expanding metal stents (cSEMS), endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT), and recently, vacuum stent therapy (VST). In this retrospective study, we report the experiences with EVT and VST at our institution.

Patients and methods

Twenty-two patients (15 male, 7 female) with leaks in the esophagus, at the esophago-gastric junction or anastomotic leaks underwent EVT by placing a sponge connected to a negative pressure pump into or near the leak. VST was applied in three patients.

Results

EVT led to closure of the leak in 18 of 22 Patients (82%). In 9 patients (41%), EVT was followed by application of a cSEMS. One patient (5%) died during the hospital stay due to an aorto-esophageal fistula near the leak, four others (18%) due to underlying disease. The stricture rate was 3/22 (14%). All three patients in whom VST was applied had closure of the leak and recovered. Reviewing the literature, we identified sixteen retrospective series of ten or more patients (n = 610) with an overall closure rate for EVT of 84%. In eight additional retrospective observations, a comparison between the efficacy of EVT and cSEMS therapy was performed that revealed a success rate of 89% and 69%, respectively (difference not significant, chi-square test). For VST, two small series show that closure is possible in the majority of patients.

Conclusion

EVT and VST are valuable options in the treatment of leaks in the upper gastrointestinal tract.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for post-esophagectomy anastomotic dehiscence as rescue treatment: a single center case series

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) represents an effective endoscopic technique for the treatment of post-esophagectomy leaks and can be used after failure of primary treatment. We aimed to investigate endoscopic data and success rate of EVT for post-esophagectomy anastomotic leaks, after failed redo surgery or previous endoscopic treatment.

METHODS

We retrospectively recruited 12 patients from January 2018 to October 2020. Success was defined as dehiscence closure at radiological and/or endoscopic evaluation. Ethical Committee of our institution approved the study.

RESULTS

Twelve patients (66.7% male, mean age 65.08 ± 16.7 years) affected by esophago-gastric (n = 10) or esophago-jejunal (n = 2) anastomosis dehiscences after oncologic surgery were treated with EVT, after failure of previous redo-surgical (n = 3, 25%) or endoscopic management (n = 9, 75%). Technical success rate was 100% (60/60 procedures) and dehiscence closure was achieved in three quarters of patients (9/12, 75%). Regarding complications, one case of sponge dislocation (1/60 = 1.7%) and another case of delayed stricture after post-EVT stent placement (1/60 = 1.7%) were recorded, during a mean follow up of 182.3 days.

CONCLUSIONS

EVT is a promising option in the treatment of the most complicated anastomotic dehiscences. Its use could be also considered after failure of previous endoscopic or surgical management.

Is Prophylactic Cervical Drainage Effective in Patients Undergoing McKeown Esophagectomy Reconstructed Through the Retrosternal Route with Two-Field Lymphadenectomy?

BACKGROUND

McKeown esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy is the treatment of choice for oncologic esophagectomy. A cervical drain is placed in cases after modern two-field lymph node dissection (M2FD) to provide information on anastomotic leakage. However, the necessity of prophylactic cervical drainage during surgery remains unknown. This study aimed to clarify the clinical significance of cervical drainage in patients who underwent McKeown esophagectomy with M2FD.

METHODS

A total of 293 patients underwent McKeown surgery with two-field lymphadenectomy at our institute between January 2013 and December 2019. We compared the day of drain removal, amount of drainage volume, and the appearance of drainage fluid between patients with and without anastomotic leakage.

RESULTS

McKeown esophagectomy reconstructed through the retrosternal route is 203 patients (69.3%) of all. Nineteen patients (6.5%) experienced anastomotic leakage. The amount of cervical drain discharge was comparable between patients with and without anastomotic leakage. In addition, no purulent or salivary discharge was observed in patients with anastomotic leakage. There was no difference in the median day of drain removal between the groups. The initial clinical findings for the diagnosis of anastomotic leakage were surgical site infection in 10 (52.6%), fever in 5 (26.3%), prolonged inflammation in a blood test in 3 (15.8%), and bloody discharge from the chest tube in 1 (5.3%). There was no mortality due to any cause.

CONCLUSION

A prophylactic cervical drain may not be mandatory in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing McKeown esophagectomy reconstructed through the retrosternal route with two-field lymphadenectomy.

Endoscopic Management for Post-Surgical Complications after Resection of Esophageal Cancer

Simple Summary

Flexible endoscopy has an important part in the diagnosis and treatment of postoperative complications after oncologically intended esophagectomy. Endoscopy offers the possibility of effective therapy with minimal invasiveness at the same time, and the use of endoscopic therapy procedures can avoid re-operations. In this review we present the advantages of endoscopic treatment opportunities during the last 20 years regarding patients’ treatment after esophageal cancer resection. According to prevalence and clinical relevance, four relevant postoperative complications were identified and their endoscopic treatment procedures discussed. All endoscopic therapy procedures for anastomotic bleeding, anastomotic insufficiencies, anastomotic stenosis and postoperative delayed gastric emptying are presented, including innovative developments.

Abstract

Background: Esophageal cancer (EC) is the sixth-leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the world. Esophagectomy is the most effective treatment for patients without invasion of adjacent organs or distant metastasis. Complications and relevant problems may occur in the early post-operative course or in a delayed fashion. Here, innovative endoscopic techniques for the treatment of postsurgical problems were developed during the past 20 years. Methods: Endoscopic treatment strategies for the following postoperative complications are presented: anastomotic bleeding, anastomotic insufficiency, delayed gastric passage and anastomotic stenosis. Based on a literature review covering the last two decades, therapeutic procedures are presented and analyzed. Results: Addressing the four complications mentioned, clipping, stenting, injection therapy, dilatation, and negative pressure therapy are successfully utilized as endoscopic treatment techniques today. Conclusion: Endoscopic treatment plays a major role in both early-postoperative and long-term aftercare. During the past 20 years, essential therapeutic measures have been established. A continuous development of these techniques in the field of endoscopy can be expected.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for the management of upper GI leaks and perforations: a multicenter retrospective study of factors associated with treatment failure (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The optimal management of upper GI (UGI) leaks and perforations remains controversial. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) is a new alternative endoscopic treatment that has recently shown a high rate of successful closure of UGI leaks and perforations. However, only few reports have been made on the factors that affect clinical success rates.

METHODS

Four referral hospitals participated in this retrospective multicenter study. Between September 2015 and February 2020, 119 patients who underwent EVT for a UGI perforation or leak were included. We retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of EVT and the factors associated with EVT failure. Neoadjuvant treatments included chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy before surgery, and the intraluminal method meant that the sponge was placed directly onto the defect within the lumen of UGI tract.

RESULTS

Among 119 patients, 84 showed clinical success (70.6%). Eighty-nine patients (74.8%) underwent EVT as primary therapy and 30 patients as rescue therapy. On multivariate analysis, neoadjuvant treatment and the intraluminal method were significant independent risk factors for EVT failure. During the follow-up period (median, 8.46 months), stenosis occurred in 22 patients (18.5%). The overall survival rate of the EVT success group was significantly higher than that of the EVT failure group. Twenty-two patients died because of non-EVT-related causes, and 7 patients died because of leakage-related adverse events. No death was caused by the EVT itself.

CONCLUSIONS

EVT is a promising treatment method for UGI leaks and perforations. Further studies are needed to establish the indications for successful EVT.

Endoscopic Management of Anastomotic Leakage after Esophageal Surgery - Ten Year Analysis in a Tertiary University Center

Background/Aims

Anastomotic leakage after esophageal surgery remains a feared complication. During the last decade, management of this complication changed from surgical revision to a more conservative and endoscopic approach. However, the treatment remains controversial as the indications for conservative, endoscopic, and surgical approaches remain non-standardized.

Methods

Between 2010 and 2020, all patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for underlying malignancy were included in this study. The data of 28 patients diagnosed with anastomotic leak were further analyzed.

Results

Among 141 patients who underwent resection, 28 (19.9%) developed an anastomotic leak, eight (28.6%) of whom died. Thirteen patients were treated with endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVT), seven patients with self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) four patients with primary surgery, one patient with a hemoclip, and three patients were treated conservatively. EVT achieved closure in 92.3% of the patients with a large defect and no EVT-related complications. SEMS therapy was successful in clinically stable patients with small defect sizes.

Conclusions

EVT can be successfully applied in the treatment of anastomotic leakage in critically ill patients, while SEMS should be limited to clinically stable patients with a small defect size. Surgery is only warranted in patients with sepsis with graft necrosis.

Endoscopic Negative Pressure Therapy (ENPT) Is Superior to Stent Therapy for Staple Line Leak After Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Single-Center Cohort Study

PURPOSE

Staple line leak (SLL) is a serious complication after sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Common endoscopic treatment options include self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), endoscopic internal drainage (EID), and endoscopic closure. The endoscopic negative pressure therapy (ENPT) is a promising treatment option combining temporary sealing of the defect with drainage of the inflammatory bed. In this study, we compare the outcome of ENPT and SEMS for the treatment of SLL following SG.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort of 27 patients (21 females) treated at a single center for SLL after SG was included. ENPT was primary therapy for 14 patients and compared with 13 patients treated primarily using SEMS.

RESULTS

ENPT was associated with a significant reduction of hospital stay (19 ± 15.1 vs. 56.69 ± 47.21 days, p = 0.027), reduced duration of endoscopic treatment (9.8 ± 8.6 vs. 44.92 ± 60.98 days, p = 0.009), and shorter transabdominal drain dwell time (15 (5-96) vs. 45 (12-162) days, p = 0.014) when compared to SEMS. Whereas endoscopic management was successful in 12/14 (85.7%) of patients from the ENPT group, SEMS was successful in only 5/13 (38.5%) of patients (p = 0.015). Furthermore, ENPT was associated with a significant reduction of endoscopic adverse events compared with SEMS (14.3% vs. 76.92% p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Compared with SEMS, ENPT is effective and safe in treating SLL after SG providing higher success rates, shorter treatment duration, and lower adverse events rates.

Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy in Patients with Transmural Defects of the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

A transmural defect of the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract is a life-threatening condition associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recently, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) was used for managing UGI defects and showed promising results. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize evidence on the efficacy of EVT in patients with transmural defects of the UGI tract. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for publications on the effect of EVT on successful closure, mortality, complications, and post-EVT strictures. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. This meta-analysis included 29 studies involving 498 participants. The pooled estimate rate of successful closure with EVT was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81-0.88). The pooled estimate rates for mortality, complications, and post-EVT strictures were 0.11, 0.10, and 0.14, respectively. According to the etiology of the transmural defect (perforation vs. leak and fistula), no significant difference was observed in successful closure (odds ratio [OR]: 1.45, 95% CI: 0.45-4.67, p = 0.53), mortality (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.24-2.46, p = 0.66), complications (OR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.17-5.15, p = 0.94), or post-EVT stricture rates (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.12-4.24, p = 0.70). The successful closure rate was significantly higher with EVT than with self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement (OR: 3.14, 95% CI: 1.23-7.98, p = 0.02). EVT is an effective and safe treatment for leaks and fistulae, as well as for perforations in the UGI. Moreover, EVT seems to be a better treatment option than SEMS placement for UGI defects.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic leak in esophagectomy and total gastrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The curative treatment for esophageal and gastric cancer is primarily surgical resection. One of the main complications related to esophagogastric surgery is the anastomotic leak. This complication is associated with a prolonged length of stay, reduced quality of life, high treatment costs, and an increased mortality rate. The placement of endoluminal stents is the most frequent endoscopic therapy in these cases. However, since its introduction, endoscopic vacuum therapy has been shown to be a promising alternative in the management of this complication. This study primarily aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic vacuum therapy for the treatment of anastomotic leak in esophagectomy and total gastrectomy. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Studies that evaluated the use of endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic leak in esophagectomy and total gastrectomy were included. Twenty-three articles were included. A total of 559 patients were evaluated. Endoscopic vacuum therapy showed a fistulous orifice closure rate of 81.6% (rate: 0.816; 95% CI: 0.777-0.864) and, when compared to the stent, there is a 16% difference in favor of endoscopic vacuum therapy (risk difference [RD]: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.05-0.27). The risk for mortality in the endoscopic vacuum therapy was 10% lower than in endoluminal stent therapy (RD: -0.10; 95% CI: -0.18 to -0.02). Endoscopic vacuum therapy might have a higher rate of fistulous orifice closure and a lower rate of mortality, compared to intraluminal stenting.

Effectiveness of endoscopic vacuum therapy as rescue treatment in refractory leaks after gastro-esophageal surgery

The treatment of leak after esophageal and gastric surgery is a major challenge. Over the last few years, endoscopic vacuum therapy (E-VAC) has gained popularity in the management of this life-threatening complication. We reported our initial experience on E-VAC therapy as rescue treatment in refractory anastomotic leak and perforation after gastro-esophageal surgery. From September 2017 to December 2019, a total of 8 E-VAC therapies were placed as secondary treatment in 7 patients. Six for anastomotic leak (3 cervical, 1 thoracic, 2 abdominal) and 1 for perforation of the gastric conduit. In 6 cases, E-VAC was placed intracavitary; while in the remaining 2, the sponge was positioned intraluminal (one patient was treated with both approaches). A total of 60 sponges were used in the whole cohort. The median number of sponge insertions was 10 (range: 5-14) with a median treatment duration of 41 days (range: 19-49). A complete healing was achieved in 4 intracavitary (67%) and in 1 intraluminal (50%) E-VAC. We observed only one E-VAC-related complication: a bleeding successfully managed endoscopically. E-VAC therapy seems to be a safe and effective tool in the management of leaks and perforations after upper GI surgery, although with longer healing time when it is used as secondary treatment.

Esophageal Perforation and EVAC in Pediatric Patients: A Case Series of Four Children

Introduction: In pediatric patients, esophageal perforation (EP) is rare but associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates of up to 20-30%. In addition to standard treatment options, endoscopic esophageal vacuum-assisted closure (EVAC) therapy has shown promising results, especially in adult patients. Thus far, the only data on technical success and effectiveness of EVAC in pediatric patients were published in 2018 by Manfredi et al. at Boston Children's Hospital. The sparse data on EVAC in children indicates that this promising technique has been barely utilized in pediatric patients. More data are needed to evaluate efficacy and outcomes of this technique in pediatric patients. Method: We reviewed five cases of therapy using EVAC, ArgyleTM Replogle Suction Catheter (RSC), or both on pediatric patients with EP in our institution between October 2018 and April 2020. Results: Five patients with EP (median 3.4 years; 2 males) were treated with EVAC, RSC, or a combination. Complete closure of EP was not achieved after EVAC alone, though patients' health stabilized and inflammation and size of EP decreased after EVAC. Four patients then were treated with RSC until the EP healed. One patient needed surgery as the recurrent fistula did not heal sufficiently after 3 weeks of EVAC therapy. Two patients developed stenosis and were successfully treated with dilatations. One patient treated with RSC alone showed persistent EP after 5 weeks. Conclusion: EVAC in pediatric patients is technically feasible and a promising method to treat EP, regardless of the underlying cause. EVAC therapy can be terminated as soon as local inflammation and C-reactive protein levels decrease, even if the mucosa is not healed completely at that time. A promising subsequent treatment is RSC. An earlier switch to RSC can substantially reduce the need of anesthesia during subsequent treatments. Our findings indicate that EVAC is more effective than RSC alone. In some cases, EVAC can be used to improve the tissues condition in preparation for a re-do surgery. At 1 year after therapy, all but one patient demonstrated sufficient weight gain. Further prospective studies with a larger cohort are required to confirm our observations from this small case series.