Esophageal perforation: principles of diagnosis and surgical management

Brain Abscess due to Streptococcus intermedius after Spontaneous Esophageal Perforation in an Adolescent

Streptococcus intermedius is an inhabitant of the oral cavity and gastrointestinal tract, known to cause deep-seated abscesses. Thereby, we present a previously healthy adolescent with esophageal perforation (EP) and secondary mediastinal and brain abscesses due to Streptococcus intermedius. EP is a potentially life-threatening condition that requires a prompt diagnosis.

The perilous consequences of bowel preparation: a case study with literature review of Boerhaave syndrome

Colonoscopy is widely acknowledged as a prevalent and efficacious approach for the diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal disorders. In order to guarantee an effective colonoscopy, it is imperative for patients to undergo an optimal bowel preparation regimen. This entails the consumption of a substantial volume of a non-absorbable solution to comprehensively purge the colon of any fecal residue. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy to acknowledge that the bowel preparation procedure may occasionally elicit adverse symptoms such as nausea and vomiting. In exceptional instances, the occurrence of excessive vomiting may lead to the rupture of the distal esophagus, a grave medical condition referred to as Boerhaave syndrome (BS). Timely identification and efficient intervention are imperative for the management of this infrequent yet potentially perilous ailment. This investigation presents a case study of a patient who developed BS subsequent to the ingestion of mannitol during bowel preparation. Furthermore, an exhaustive examination of extant case reports and pertinent literature on esophageal perforation linked to colonoscopy has been conducted. This analysis provides valuable insights into the prevention, reduction, and treatment of such serious complications.

Esophageal Perforation After Anterior Cervical Surgery: A Case Report and Literature Review

SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND

Esophageal perforation (EP) after anterior cervical surgery is a rare but potentially life-threatening condition. EP caused by malpositioned implants in cervical spine injury with multiple comorbidities is challenging to treat simultaneously.

STUDY

This was a case report study.

PURPOSE OF STUDY

The aim of this study was to present successful treatment of EP in a subluxated C5-C6 level with implant failure, infection, septicemia, and comorbidities. The aim was to emphasize the need for a multispecialty approach while treating serious complications.

CASE

A 72-year-old woman presented to the ER with a history of operated cervical spine a week ago and having breathlessness, fever, wound infection, and tracheostomy in situ. After primary investigations, the patient was initially treated in the intensive care unit, where bleeding from the tracheostomy site was noticed. Upon endoscopy, EP was diagnosed due to implant failure. She was operated for revision cervical spine surgery (drainage of pus with anterior and posterior cervical fixation) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube insertion (esophageal diversion). On exploration of EP, a decision was made to perform conservative treatment as initial tag sutures did not hold due to infection. Postoperatively, the patient developed rectal bleed 3 times, which was ultimately treated with cecal bleed embolization. The infected cervical wound was managed with an open dressing. The patient was managed with intermittent assisted ventilation through tracheostomy postoperatively. Barium swallow at 10 weeks confirmed healing of EP and oral feed was started. Tracheostomy closure was performed once the wound had healed, and the patient was discharged with improved neurology at 12 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative problems after cervical surgery such as breathing difficulty, wound discharge, and worsening of neurology may lead to suspicion of underlying EP due to implant failure. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy needs to be considered for a prompt diagnosis. Revision spine surgery with treatment of perforation simultaneously and maintenance of enteral nutrition through a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube with a multispecialty approach is recommended for this potentially life-threatening condition.

New Endoscopic Solutions in Managing Phlegmonous Esophagitis

A 48-year-old woman was admitted in the emergency department due to epigastric pain, nausea, vomiting, and cough. She presented with fever and increased inflammatory parameters. A thoracoabdominal computed tomography (CT) was performed and revealed thickening of the gastric fundus and esophagus, with an apparent laceration in esophageal mucosa and associated dissection of esophageal wall. In upper endoscopy (UE), a bulging of esophageal and gastric walls was observed, with an ulceration in proximal esophagus, suggestive of a perforation. After multidisciplinary discussion, a minimally invasive endoscopic approach was decided. Internal esophageal drainage (IED) was assured with performance of some incisions with Dual-knife® (Olympus, Tokyo) along the mucosal and submucosal layers in the esophagus. During the incision, extravasation of pus was evident. One week later, due to clinical worsening and evidence of esophageal perforation in CT scan, UE was repeated. We confirmed esophageal perforation with visualization of two millimetric defects in the proximal esophagus. Significant bulging of the gastric fundus and body was also observed. IED was repeated with mucosal incision of the gastric bulging using Needle-Cut 3V® (Olympus, Tokyo), with extravasation of a significant quantity of pus. We decided to proceed to endoscopic vacuum therapy that was performed with sponge placement in the esophageal lumen (Endosponge®, B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany). UE was repeated 1 week later with sponge removal and confirmation of resolution of esophageal perforation. An improvement of the thickening of gastric fundus and body was also seen. One month later after admission, the patient was discharged home, eating normally, and remains well in the follow-up.

Subtotal esophagectomy followed by subtotal gastric reconstruction for Boerhaave's syndrome: Case report with literature review

INTRODUCTION

Boerhaave's syndrome, or spontaneous esophageal rupture, is a potentially fatal disease requiring prompt diagnosis and effective treatment. We report Boerhaave's syndrome in a patient who underwent subtotal esophagectomy and temporary cervical esophagostomy for esophageal perforation to the right thoracic cavity, followed by subtotal gastric reconstruction as the second step.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 70-year-old man with diarrhea and vomiting as chief complaints had underlying disease of reflux esophagitis. He experienced frequent hematemesis. Computed tomography (CT) at another hospital revealed right pleural effusion and abnormal mediastinal air and fluid retention around the esophagus, and he was transferred to our hospital. From the CT findings, he was diagnosed as having Boerhaave's syndrome with esophageal perforation into the right thoracic cavity. He was in shock, and emergency right thoracotomy was performed, revealing a severely purulent thoracic cavity, ruptured parietal pleura, and 5-cm perforation in the right front middle esophageal wall that was surrounded by mucosal necrosis. Subtotal esophagectomy, temporal cervical esophagostomy, and enteral feeding tube insertion were performed. After hospital discharge, he underwent subtotal gastric reconstruction 43 days postoperatively. His course was good, and he was transferred to another hospital for rehabilitation 36 days after reconstruction.

DISCUSSION

In Boerhaave's syndrome, depending on the size of the perforation and fragility of the esophageal wall, subtotal esophagectomy may be feasible.

CONCLUSION

Two-step reconstruction following esophageal rupture is possible after sufficient local infection control, and anastomosis can be performed if the patient's general condition is good, but only under conditions that guarantee no anastomotic leakage.

CT Esophagography for Evaluation of Esophageal Perforation

Esophageal emergencies such as rupture or postoperative leak are uncommon but may be life threatening when they occur. Delay in their diagnosis and treatment may significantly increase morbidity and mortality. Causes of esophageal injury include iatrogenic (including esophagogastroduodenoscopy and stent placement), foreign body ingestion, blunt or penetrating trauma to the chest or abdomen, and forceful retching, also called Boerhaave syndrome. Although fluoroscopic esophagography remains the imaging study of choice according the American College of Radiology appropriateness criteria, CT esophagography has been shown to be at least equal to if not superior to fluoroscopic evaluation for esophageal injury. In addition, CT esophagography allows diagnosis of extraesophageal abnormalities, both as the cause of the patient's symptoms as well as incidental findings. CT esophagography also allows rapid diagnosis since the examination can be readily performed in most clinical settings and requires no direct radiologist supervision, requiring only properly trained technologists and a CT scanner. Multiple prior studies have shown the limited utility of fluoroscopic esophagography after a negative chest CT scan and the increase in accuracy after adding oral contrast agent to CT examinations, although there is considerable variability of CT esophagography protocols among institutions. Development of a CT esophagography program, utilizing a well-defined protocol with input from staff from the radiology, gastroenterology, emergency, and general surgery departments, can facilitate more rapid diagnosis and patient care, especially in overnight and emergency settings. The purpose of this article is to familiarize radiologists with CT esophagography techniques and imaging findings of emergent esophageal conditions. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2021.

Boerhaave's syndrome: A case report of damage control approach

INTRODUCTION

Boerhaave's syndrome is a life-threatening oesophageal perforation that carries a high mortality rate (20-50%). Diagnosis is difficult by its rarity and the absence of typical symptoms. Treatment of this condition usually requires surgical intervention.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

We report the case of a 77-year-old man that resorted to the emergency room with dyspnoea and thoracic pain after vomiting. CT scan revealed pneumomediastinum, left collapse lung and loculated pleural effusion. A left intercostal chest tube was inserted with food drainage. Hence, Boerhaave's syndrome was suspected. Thoracotomy with mediastinum debridement, pleural drainage and oesophageal T-tube drainage was performed. Patient was admitted on the Intensive Care Unit with septic shock, with need for ventilatory support and vasopressor therapy. Two days later, a second look thoracotomy was done with definitive oesophageal repair and pleural patch. The post-operative course was complicated by pneumonia and stroke. Patient was discharged home on the 38th day and remains well at 3 month of follow-up.

DISCUSSION

Delayed diagnosis and treatment are the principal causes of high mortality in Boerhaave's syndrome. The classic Mackler's triad (vomiting, lower thoracic pain and subcutaneous emphysema) is present in less then 50% of cases. A thoracic drainage may be useful to confirm diagnosis promptly. There is no standard treatment option. In this case report, the authors used a damage control approach to control sepsis, allowing for a delayed definitive oesophageal repair.

CONCLUSION

Prompt diagnosis with thoracic drainage and a damage control treatment plan might lead to good prognosis for patients with this rare and potentially fatal condition.

Esophageal Foreign Bodies and Obstruction in the Emergency Department Setting: An Evidence-Based Review

BACKGROUND

Patients with esophageal foreign bodies or food bolus impaction may present to the emergency department with symptoms ranging from mild discomfort to severe distress. There is a dearth of emergency medicine-focused literature concerning these conditions.

OBJECTIVE OF THE REVIEW

This narrative review provides evidence-based recommendations for the assessment and management of patients with esophageal foreign bodies and food bolus impactions.

DISCUSSION

Esophageal foreign bodies and food bolus impaction are common but typically pass spontaneously; however, complete obstruction can lead to inability to tolerate secretions, airway compromise, and death. Pediatric patients are the most common population affected, while in adults, edentulous patients are at greatest risk. Foreign body obstruction and food bolus impaction typically occur at sites of narrowing due to underlying esophageal pathology. Diagnosis is based on history and examination, with most patients presenting with choking/gagging, vomiting, and dysphagia/odynophagia. The preferred test is a plain chest radiograph, although this is not required if the clinician suspects non-bony food bolus with no suspicion of perforation. Computed tomography is recommended if radiograph is limited or there are concerns for perforation. Management requires initial assessment of the patient's airway. Medications evaluated include effervescent agents, glucagon, calcium channel blockers, benzodiazepines, nitrates, and others, but their efficacy is poor. Before administration, shared decision making with the patient is recommended. Endoscopy is the intervention of choice, and medications should not delay endoscopy. Early endoscopy for complete obstruction is associated with improved outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides evidence-based recommendations concerning these conditions, focusing on evaluation and management.

Surgical management of early and late esophageal perforation

Introduction

Esophageal perforation is a rare and life-threating problem with a 10%–40% mortality rate. Early diagnosis and treatment are important for prevention of complications. Strategies for treatment of esophageal perforation have been controversial for many years, especially in cases of late presentation.

Methods

We prospectively studied 27 patients (12 male, 17 female, mean age 42.7 ± 17.8 years) who presented with esophageal perforation from 1996 to 2015, and evaluated the results of surgical treatment. The patients were divided into 3 groups according to time of presentation: early (<24 h), intermediate (24–72 h), and late (>72 h). We also considered the etiology and site of esophageal perforation, complications, and mortality.

Results

Surgery was performed in 5 patients in the early group, 7 in the moderate group, and 15 in the late group. Primary repair was carried out in 5 cases, primary repair and reinforcement with a flap in 10, esophageal resection and reconstruction in 8, and a T-tube stent was used in 4. Four patients developed a fistula postoperatively, and there was one death due to respiratory failure. No relationship was found between complications and the cause of perforation, time of presentation, or type of treatment.

Conclusion

In patients without sepsis, primary repair can be an option even in those presenting late after esophageal perforation, with an acceptable result.

Thoracic perforations-surgical techniques

Esophageal perforation may occur spontaneously, iatrogenically or in connection with traumas. Sepsis may develop in connection with mediastinal and pleural exposure in a very short time as a consequence of disintegration of the esophagus. Esophageal perforation is an emergency accompanied with a high level of mortality and morbidity. Rate of mortality for the perforations in the thoracic region is higher than that in the cervical and abdominal regions. Delay in diagnosis and treatment is the most important factor to affect the mortality. A quick and true diagnosis of esophageal perforation is prerequisite for a successful treatment. There is no certain consensus in relation with the optimal treatment of that life-threatening condition. However, in the event that perforation is detected early in a healthy esophagus, then primary repair is recommended. When it is detected late, nonoperative conservative treatment would be appropriate. The rates of mortality for the operations following a period of 24 h after rupture formation are higher than 50%. Esophagectomy is a type of an operation that is to be considered in the event of an end stage benign esophageal disease or of a large esophageal damage that does not allow primary repair. Significant decrease has been observed in the morbidity and mortality of esophageal perforation due to the improvements in the endoscopical techniques today. Minimally invasive techniques, in which drug eluting stents come first, will become an important step for the treatment of esophageal perforations in the forthcoming years.

Outcomes following the main treatment options in patients with a leaking esophagus: a systematic literature review

Leakage from the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction can be lethal due to uncontrolled contamination of the mediastinum. The most predominant risk factors for the subsequent clinical outcome are the patients' delay as well as the delay of diagnosis. Two major therapeutic concepts have been advocated: either prompt closure of the leakage by insertion of a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) or more traditionally, surgical exploration. The objective of this review is to carefully scrutinize the recent literature and assess the outcomes of these two therapeutic alternatives in the management of iatrogenic perforation-spontaneous esophageal rupture as separated from those with anastomotic leak. A systematic web-based search using PubMed and the Cochrane Library was performed, reviewing literature published between January 2005 and December 2015. Eligible studies included all studies that presented data on the outcome of SEMS or surgical exploration in case of esophageal leak (including >3 patients). Only patients older than 15 years of age by the time of admission were included. Articles in other languages but English were excluded. Treatment failure was defined as a need for change in therapeutic strategy due to uncontrolled sepsis and mediastinitis, which usually meant rescue esophagectomy with end esophagostomy, death occurring as a consequence of the leakage or development of an esophagorespiratory fistula and/or other serious life threatening complications. Accordingly, the corresponding success rate is composed of cases where none of the failures above occurred. Regarding SEMS treatment, 201 articles were found, of which 48 were deemed relevant and of these, 17 articles were further analyzed. As for surgical management, 785 articles were retrieved, of which 82 were considered relevant, and 17 were included in the final analysis. It was not possible to specifically extract detailed clinical outcomes in sufficient numbers, when we tried to separately analyze the data in relation to the cause of the leakage: i.e. iatrogenic perforation-spontaneous esophageal rupture and anastomotic leak. As for SEMS treatment, originally 154 reports focused on iatrogenic perforation, 116 focused on spontaneous ruptures, and only four described the outcome following trauma and foreign body management. Only five studies used a prospective protocol to assess treatment efficacy. Regarding a leaking anastomosis, 80 reports contained information about the outcome after treatment of esophagogastrostomies and 35 reported the clinical course after an esophagojejunostomy. An overall success rate of 88% was reported among the 371 SEMS-treated patients, where adequate data were available, with a reported in hospital mortality amounting to 7.5%. Regarding the surgical exploration strategy, the vast majority of patients had an attempt to repair the defect by direct or enforced suturing. This surgical approach also included procedures such as patching with pleura or with a diaphragmatic flap. The overall reported success rate was 83% (305/368) and the in-hospital mortality was 17% (61/368). The current literature suggests that a SEMS-based therapy can be successfully applied as an alternative therapeutic strategy in esophageal perforation rupture.

Development of a Multidisciplinary Program to Expedite Care of Esophageal Emergencies

BACKGROUND

Level 1 programs have improved outcomes by expediting the multidisciplinary care of critically ill patients. We established a novel level 1 program for the management of esophageal emergencies.

METHODS

After institutional review board approval, we performed a retrospective analysis of patients referred to our level 1 esophageal emergency program from April 2013 through November 2015. A historical comparison group of patients treated for the same diagnosis in the previous 2 years was used.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were referred and transported an average distance of 56 miles (range, 1-163 miles). Median time from referral to arrival was 2.4 hours (range, 0.4-12.9 hours). Referrals included 6 (7%) patients with esophageal obstruction and 71 (89%) patients with suspected esophageal perforation. Of the patients with suspected esophageal perforation, causes included iatrogenic (n = 26), Boerhaave's syndrome (n = 32), and other (n = 13). Forty-six percent (n = 33) of patients were referred because of pneumomediastinum, but perforation could not be subsequently demonstrated. Initial management of patients with documented esophageal perforation included operative treatment (n = 25), endoscopic intervention (n = 8), and supportive care (n = 5). Retrospective analysis demonstrated a statistically significant difference in mean Pittsburgh severity index score (PSS) between esophageal perforation treatment groups (p < 0.01). In patients with confirmed perforations, there were 3 (8%) mortalities within 30 days. More patients in the esophageal level 1 program were transferred to our institution in less than 24 hours after diagnosis than in the historical comparison group (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Development of an esophageal emergency referral program has facilitated multidisciplinary care at a high-volume institution, and early outcomes appear favorable.

Endoscopic Management of Benign Esophageal Ruptures and Leaks

OPINION STATEMENT

Esophageal leaks (EL) and ruptures (ER) are rare conditions associated with a high risk of mortality and morbidity. Historically, EL and ER have been surgically treated, but current treatment options also include conservative management and endoscopy. Over the last decades, interventional endoscopy has evolved as an effective and less invasive alternative to primary surgery in these cases. A variety of techniques are currently available to re-establish the continuity of the digestive tract, prevent or treat infection related to the leak/rupture, prevent further contamination, drain potential collections, and provide nutritional support. Endoscopic options include clips, both through the scope (TTS) and over the scope (OTS), stent placement, vacuum therapy, tissue adhesive, and endoscopic suturing techniques. Theoretically, all of these can be used alone or with a multimodality approach. Endoscopic therapy should be combined with medical therapy but also with percutaneous drainage of collections, where present. There is robust evidence suggesting that this change of therapeutic paradigm in the form of endoscopic therapy is associated with improved outcome, better quality of life, and shortened length of hospital stay. Moreover, recent European guidelines on endoscopic management of iatrogenic perforation have strengthened and to some degree regulated and redefined the role of endoscopy in the management of conditions where there is a breach in the continuity of the GI wall. Certainly, due to the complexity of these conditions and the variety of available treatment options, a multidisciplinary approach is strongly recommended, with close clinical monitoring (by endoscopists, surgeons, and intensive care physicians) and special attention to signs of sepsis, which can lead to the need for urgent surgical management. This review article will critically discuss the literature regarding endoscopic modalities for esophageal leak and perforation management and attempt to place them in perspective for the physician.

Pediatric esophagopleural fistula: Two case reports and a literature review

Esophagopleural fistula (EPF) is rarely reported in children with a high misdiagnosis rate. This study aimed to reveal the clinical manifestations and managements of EPF in children.Two pediatric cases of EPF in our hospital were reported. A bibliographic search was performed on the PubMed, WANFANG, and CNKI databases for EPF-related reports published between January 1980 and May 2016. The pathogeny, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, treatments, and prognosis of EPF patients were collected and discussed.Based on conservative treatments, 1 pediatric EPF case induced by cervical trauma was cured by longitudinal septum incision-mediated drainage. The other pediatric EPF induced by endoscopic balloon dilation was cured by dual stent implantation. A total of 38 studies of 197 EPF patients (191 adults and 6 children) were reviewed. Latrogenic factor, esophageal foreign body, and infection are considered the main causes of EPF in children. Unilateral pleural effusion accompanied by food residue was the main manifestations of EPF. Chest computed tomography (CT) and contrast esophagography were usually used in the diagnosis of EPF with high accuracy. Surgical treatment in adults with EPF exhibited a significantly higher cure rate and lower mortality rate than conservative treatment (P < .01).Pleural effusion with food residue is a specific finding in EPF. Chest CT exhibited high sensitivity for the diagnosis of EPF. Conservative treatment may be preferable for pediatric patients with EPF.

Boerhaave syndrome - case report

CONTEXT:

Boerhaave syndrome consists of spontaneous longitudinal transmural rupture of the esophagus, usually in its distal part. It generally develops during or after persistent vomiting as a consequence of a sudden increase in intraluminal pressure in the esophagus. It is extremely rare in clinical practice. In 50% of the cases, it is manifested by Mackler's triad: vomiting, lower thoracic pain and subcutaneous emphysema. Hematemesis is an uncommon yet challenging presentation of Boerhaave's syndrome. Compared with ruptures of other parts of the digestive tract, spontaneous rupture is characterized by a higher mortality rate.

CASE REPORT:

This paper presents a 64-year-old female patient whose vomit was black four days before examination and became bloody on the day of the examination. Her symptoms included epigastric pain and suffocation. Physical examination showed hypotension, tachycardia, dyspnea and a swollen and painful abdomen. Auscultation showed lateral crackling sounds on inspiration. Ultrasound examination showed a distended stomach filled with fluid. Over 1000 ml of fresh blood was extracted by means of nasogastric suction. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy was discontinued immediately upon entering the proximal esophagus, where a large amount of fresh blood was observed. The patient was sent for emergency abdominal surgery, during which she died. An autopsy established a diagnosis of Boerhaave syndrome and ulceration in the duodenal bulb.

CONCLUSION:

Boerhaave syndrome should be considered in all cases with a combination of gastrointestinal symptoms (especially epigastric pain and vomiting) and pulmonary signs and symptoms (especially suffocation).

Predictors of Morbidity and Mortality in Esophageal Perforation: Retrospective Study of 80 Patients

Background and Aims:

Esophageal perforation is a life-threatening disease. Factors impacting morbidity and mortality include the cause and site of the perforation, the time to diagnosis, and the therapeutic procedure. This study aimed to identify risk factors for morbidity and mortality after esophageal perforation.

Patients and Methods:

This retrospective study analyzed data collected from all patients treated for esophageal perforation at the Department of Surgery, University of Schleswig–Holstein, Luebeck Campus, from January 1986 through December 2011.

Results:

Altogether, 80 patients (52 men, 28 women; mean age 65 years) were treated. The cause of perforation was intraluminal in 44 (55%) (group A) and extraluminal in 2 (3%) (group B). Spontaneous perforations were observed in 12 (15%) (group C). Perforations were due to a preexisting esophageal disease in 22 (28%) (group D). The survival rate was higher for group A (82%) than for groups B (50%), C (57%), and D (59%). The distal third of the esophagus had the highest prevalence of perforations (49, 61%) independent of the cause. Mortality, however, was independent of the perforation site. Perforations were diagnosed within 24 h in 57% (n = 46) of patients, associated with a statistically significant lower mortality rate (p = 0.035). Altogether, 40 patients underwent non-operative treatment, and among those 27 had endoscopic treatment. Emergency thoracic surgery was performed in 40 patients: direct suture of the defect (n = 26), partial esophageal resection (n = 11), other (n = 3). Significantly higher morbidity (p = 0.007) and prolonged hospitalization (p < 0.0001) was observed among patients who underwent emergency surgery. Mortality was higher in the surgical group (14/40) than in the non-operative treatment group (9/40) but without statistical significance.

Conclusion:

Intraluminal perforations, rapid initiation of therapy, and non-operative treatment were associated with favorable outcomes. The perforation site did not have an impact on outcomes. Esophageal resection was associated with high mortality.

Boerhaave's syndrome presenting as a mid-esophageal perforation associated with a right-sided pleural effusion

There are few published case reports of Boerhaave's syndrome presenting as a mid-esophageal perforation associated with a right-sided pleural effusion. We present an unusual case of spontaneous perforation of the mid-esophagus and discuss the surgical management and outcome. Our case underscores the importance of a meticulous diagnostic and therapeutic approach to the management of an often elusive and difficult disease process.

Evaluation of urgent esophagectomy in esophageal perforation

Background

Esophageal trauma is considered one of the most severe lesions of the digestive tract. There is still much controversy in choosing the best treatment for cases of esophageal perforation since that decision involves many variables. The readiness of medical care, the patient's clinical status, the local conditions of the perforated segment, and the severity of the associated injuries must be considered for the most adequate therapeutic choice.

Aim

To demonstrate and to analyze the results of urgent esophagectomy in a series of patients with esophageal perforation.

Methods

A retrospective study of 31 patients with confirmed esophageal perforation. Most injuries were due to endoscopic dilatation of benign esophageal disorders, which had evolved with stenosis. The diagnosis of perforation was based on clinical parameters, laboratory tests, and endoscopic images. ‪The main surgical technique used was transmediastinal esophagectomy followed by reconstruction of the digestive tract in a second surgical procedure. Patients were evaluated for the development of systemic and local complications, especially for the dehiscence or stricture of the anastomosis of the cervical esophagus with either the stomach or the transposed colon.

Results

Early postoperative evaluation showed a survival rate of 77.1% in relation to the proposed surgery, and 45% of these patients presented no further complications. The other patients had one or more complications, being pulmonary infection and anastomotic fistula the most frequent. The seven patients (22.9%) who underwent esophageal resection 48 hours after the diagnosis died of sepsis. At medium and long-term assessments, most patients reported a good quality of life and full satisfaction regarding the surgery outcomes.

Conclusions

Despite the morbidity, emergency esophagectomy has its validity, especially in well indicated cases of esophageal perforation subsequent to endoscopic dilation for benign strictures.

Management of cervical esophageal and hypopharyngeal perforations

PURPOSE

Evidence is limited for outcomes of surgical versus conservative management for patients with cervical esophageal or hypopharyngeal perforations.

METHODS

Patients with cervical esophageal or hypopharyngeal perforations treated between 1994 and 2014 were identified using an institutional database. Outcomes were compared between patients who underwent operative drainage and those who had conservative management with broad-spectrum antibiotics and withholding oral intake.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were identified with hypopharyngeal or cervical esophageal perforations, mostly due to iatrogenic (nasogastric tube placement, endoscopy, endotracheal intubation) injuries (68%). Fourteen were treated initially with conservative management and 14 with initial surgery. Six patients failed conservative treatment and two patients failed surgical treatment. Patients managed conservatively who had eaten between injury and diagnosis (p=0.003), those who had 24 hours or more between the time of injury and diagnosis (p=0.026), and those who showed signs of systemic toxicity (p=0.001) were significantly more likely to fail conservative treatment and require surgery. No variables were significant for treatment failure in the surgical group. Of the 20 patients who ultimately underwent a surgical procedure, two required a second procedure.

CONCLUSION

Patients who have eaten between the time of perforation and diagnosis, have 24 hours or more between injury and diagnosis, and those that show signs of systemic toxicity are at higher risk of failing conservative management and surgical drainage should be considered. For patients without these risk factors, a trial of conservative management can be attempted.

Full-thickness esophageal perforation after fluoroscopic balloon dilation: incidence and management in 820 adult patients

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to investigate the incidence, management, and outcomes of esophageal perforation after fluoroscopic balloon dilation in 820 adult patients with esophageal diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between December 1990 and April 2014, a total of 820 adult patients (age range, 21-93 years) underwent 1869 fluoroscopic balloon dilation sessions (mean, 2.3 sessions/patient; range, 1-29 sessions/patient) for esophageal diseases. We retrospectively reviewed the prospectively collected medical records and images of these patients and collected the data of patients who developed esophageal perforations after fluoroscopic balloon dilation.

RESULTS

During this period, 12 patients (six men and six women; mean age, 51 years; age range, 28-69 years) developed perforations. The perforation rate was 1.5% per patient and 0.6% per dilation. Among the first eight patients, four who were treated with surgery had perforations 2 cm or larger, and the other four who underwent fasting, parenteral alimentation, and treatment with antibiotics had perforations smaller than 2 cm. The last four patients underwent stent placement immediately after the diagnosis, regardless of the perforation's size. The median hospital stay was 11.5 days.

CONCLUSION

Fluoroscopic balloon dilation of esophageal diseases is a safe procedure with a low perforation rate. A perforation size greater than 2 cm is considered large and requires aggressive treatment. Although the number of patients with esophageal perforation we treated is relatively small and further clinical trials are needed, temporary stent placement seems to be an initial choice in the management of esophageal perforations after fluoroscopic balloon dilation.

Rare cause of oesophagus perforation

•

Oesophagus perforation is a very serious clinical event.

•

Mortality rates increase because inexperienced physicians cannot make a diagnosis.

•

Although there is no consensus in literature on surgical treatment choices.

INTRODUCTION

Oesophagus perforations, which are generally caused by iatrogenic injuries, are a serious clinical event. There are still high rates of mortality and morbidity and there is no gold standard of surgical treatment.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

The case is here presented of a 54-year old female with complaints of dysphagia after having swallowed a bone in food, who was determined with oesophagus perforation on CT examination.

DISCUSSION

Oesophagus perforation generally occurs secondary to interventional procedures and rarely develops associated with foreign bodies. Treatment depends on the perforation site and dimension.

CONCLUSION

While conservative primary surgical repair may be chosen for cervical lesions, more aggressive approaches such as resection and delayed reconstruction are recommended for thoracic lesions. Early determination and appropriate treatment are life-saving.

The success of surgery in the first 24 hours in patients with esophageal perforation

OBJECTIVE

Esophageal perforation (EP) is a critical and potentially life-threatening condition with considerable rates of morbidity and mortality. Despite many advances in thoracic surgery, the management of patients with EP is still controversial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 34 patients treated for EP, 62% male, mean age 53.9 years. Sixty-two percent of the EPs were iatrogenic. Spontaneous and traumatic EP rates were 26% and 6%, respectively. Three patients had EP in the cervical esophagus and 31 in the thoracic esophagus.

RESULTS

Mean time to initial treatment was 34.2 hours. Twenty patients comprised the early group <24 h) and 14 patients the late group (>24 h). Management of the EP included primary closure in 30 patients, non-surgical treatment in two, stent in one and resection in one. Mortality occurred in nine of the 34 patients (26%). Mortality was EP-related in four patients. Three of the nine patients that died were in the early group (p<0.05). Mean hospital stay was 13.4 days.

CONCLUSION

EP remains a potentially fatal condition and requires early diagnosis and accurate treatment to prevent the morbidity and mortality.

Pathogenesis and outcomes of traumatic injuries of the esophagus

Traumatic injury of the esophagus is extremely uncommon. The aims of this study were to use the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcome Study (PTOS) database to identify clinical factors predictive of esophageal trauma, and to report the morbidity and mortality of this injury. A cross-sectional review of patients presenting to 20 Level I trauma centers in Pennsylvania from 2004 to 2010 was performed. We compared clinical and demographic variables between patients with and without esophageal trauma both prior to and after arrival in the emergency room (ER). Primary mechanism of injury and clinical outcomes were analyzed. There were 231 694 patients and 327 (0.14%) had esophageal trauma. Patients with esophageal trauma were considerably younger than those without this injury. The risk of esophageal trauma was markedly increased in males (odds ratio [OR] = 2.62 [CI 1.98-3.47]). The risk was also increased in African Americans (OR = 4.61 [CI 3.65-5.82]). Most cases were from penetrating gunshot and stab wounds. Only 34 (10.4%) of esophageal trauma patients underwent an upper endoscopy; diagnosis was usually made by CT, surgery, or autopsy. Esophageal trauma patients were more likely to require surgery (35.8% vs. 12.5%; P < 0.001). Patients with esophageal trauma had a substantially higher mortality than those without the injury (20.5% vs. 1.4%; P < 0.005). In logistic regression modeling, traumatic injury of the esophagus (OR = 3.43 [2.50-4.71]) and male gender (OR = 1.52 [1.46-1.59]) were independently associated with mortality. For those patients with esophageal trauma, there was an association between trauma severity and mortality (OR = 1.10 [1.07-1.12]) but not for undergoing surgery within the first 24 hours of hospitalization (OR = 0.84; 0.39-1.83). Our study on traumatic injury of the esophagus is in concordance with previous studies demonstrating that this injury is rare but carries considerable morbidity (∼46%) and mortality (∼20%). The injury has a higher morbidity and mortality when the thoracic esophagus is involved compared to the cervical esophagus alone. The injury most commonly occurs in younger, Black males suffering gunshot wounds. Efforts to control gun violence in Pennsylvania are of paramount importance.

Treatment of Esophageal Perforation: A Single-Center Expertise

Background and Aims:

Esophageal perforation is a rare diagnosis, which is associated with a high morbidity and mortality. There is only small scientific background regarding the best choice of treatment. Parameters indicating a good clinical outcome seem to be localization, depth of the defect, pre-existing risk factors, and time interval between the event and start of treatment.

Material and Methods:

We evaluate retrospective data from 39 patients who were treated with a esophageal perforation in our hospital between 2004 and 2012.

Results and Conclusions:

Our collected data agree with the available published literature. Endoscopic treatment seems to be favorable in early diagnosis.

Esophageal perforation management using a multidisciplinary minimally invasive treatment algorithm

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of esophageal perforation (EP) often results in mortality and significant morbidity. Recent less invasive approaches to EP management include endoscopic luminal stenting and minimally invasive surgical therapies. We wished to establish therapeutic efficacy of minimally invasive therapies in a consecutive series of patients.

STUDY DESIGN

An IRB-approved retrospective review of all acute EPs between 2007 and 2013 at a single institution was performed. Patient demographic, clinical outcomes data, and hospital charges were collected.

RESULTS

We reviewed 76 consecutive patients with acute EP presenting to our tertiary care center. Median age was 64 ± 16 years (range 25 to 87 years), with 50 men and 26 women. Ninety percent of EPs were in the distal esophagus, with 67% of iatrogenic perforations occurring within 4 cm of the gastroesophageal junction. All patients were treated within 24 hours of initial presentation with a removable covered esophageal stent. Leak occlusion was confirmed within 48 hours of esophageal stent placement in 68 patients. Median lengths of ICU and hospital stay were 3 and 10 days, respectively (range 1 to 86 days). One-third of the patients were noted to have prolonged intubation (>7 days) and pneumonia that required a tracheostomy. One in-hospital (1.3%) mortality occurred within 30 days. Median total hospital charges for EP were $85,945.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopically placed removable esophageal stents with minimally invasive repair of the perforation and feeding access is an effective treatment method for patients with EP. This multidisciplinary method enabled us to care for severely ill patients while minimizing morbidity and mortality and avoiding open esophageal surgery.

Esophagography after pneumomediastinum without CT findings of esophageal perforation: is it necessary?

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our study was to determine the necessity of fluoroscopic esophagography in patients with pneumomediastinum on CT but without CT findings of esophageal perforation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2010, there were 4305 fluoroscopic esophagography examinations including 533 with CT identified from a search of our PACS. Patients with pneumomediastinum on CT who were subsequently referred for emergent fluoroscopic esophagography to exclude esophageal perforation were enrolled. Fluoroscopic esophagography examinations performed within 3 days of CT were included. Patients with a history of esophageal disease were excluded. As a result, 103 patients were enrolled in the study; patients were divided into groups on the basis of whether there was additional clinical history of esophageal damage (trauma group) or not (nontrauma group). Images were reviewed by two board-certified radiologists blinded to the clinical data and radiologic reports for the presence or absence of esophageal perforation. A positive result on CT was defined as esophageal injury or periesophageal infiltration that coexisted with periesophageal air. A positive fluoroscopic esophagography result was defined as oral contrast medium leakage from the esophagus.

RESULTS

Esophageal perforation was diagnosed in 15 of the 103 patients. The CT findings were significantly correlated with esophageal perforation (p < 0.001 in the trauma group, and p = 0.001 in the nontrauma group). The respective sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) of CT versus fluoroscopic esophagography in the trauma group were 100% versus 66.7% and 100% versus 87.9%; in the nontrauma group, the sensitivity and NPV were 100% for CT and fluoroscopic esophagography. Thus, the sensitivity and NPV of CT were either superior or equal to those of fluoroscopic esophagography.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study suggest that performing fluoroscopic esophagography in patients with pneumomediastinum is unnecessary when CT is negative for esophageal perforation.

Esophageal perforation and rupture: a comprehensive medicolegal examination of 59 jury verdicts and settlements

BACKGROUND

Consequences accompanying esophageal perforation make this complication a prime litigation target. We characterize factors in jury verdicts and settlements regarding esophageal perforation, including operative procedure, patient demographics, alleged cause(s) of malpractice, outcome, and other factors.

METHODS

Pertinent court records were examined for the aforementioned factors.

RESULTS

Gastroenterologists, general surgeons, and anesthesiologists were the most commonly named defendants. Two thirds of outcomes were for the defendant, and 11.9 % were settled (median--$650,000); 20.3% resulted in awarded damages (median--$1.2 M). Esophagogastroduodenoscopy was the most commonly litigated procedure, followed by intubation and Nissen fundoplication. Necessity of repair, delayed diagnosis, death, and inadequate consent were the most frequently cited factors in litigation.

CONCLUSIONS

An understanding of the factors important in determining legal responsibility is of great interest for practitioners in multiple specialties. The requirement of surgical repair and a delay in diagnosis are two of the most common factors present in litigated cases resulting in a payment. The importance of explicitly listing esophageal perforation in the informed consent for esophagogastroduodenoscopy, abdominal surgery, and any patients at risk of intubation injury needs to be emphasized.

Esophageal perforation caused by a fish bone treated with surgically indwelling drainage and fibrin glue injection for fistula formation

We herein report a case of thoracic esophageal perforation caused by a fish bone. The patient was a 68-year-old female who presented with a persistent sore throat after eating sea bream four days previously. She was diagnosed with an esophageal perforation and posterior mediastinal abscess formation by chest computed tomography and inflammatory findings in her blood test. Surgically indwelling drainage was able to effectively control the leakage of contaminants and infection. Endoscopic injection of fibrin glue into the long-standing thoracic-esophageal fistula promoted closure of the esophageal wall defect and enabled her to restart oral intake. This case report suggests that effective drainage and the use of fibrin glue sealant may be one of the treatment options for esophageal perforation.

Surgical endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic leakage and perforation of the upper gastrointestinal tract

INTRODUCTION

Emergency operations for perforations and anastomotic leakage of the upper gastrointestinal tract are associated with a high overall morbidity and mortality rate. An endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has been established successfully for anastomotic leakage after rectal resection but only limited data exist for EVT of the upper GI tract.

METHODS

We report on a series of nine patients treated with EVT for defects of the upper intestinal tract between March 2011 and May 2012. In four patients, initial endoscopic sponge placement was performed in combination with open surgical revision. Median follow-up was 189 (range, 51-366) days.

RESULTS

In total, 52 vacuum sponges were placed in upper GI defects of nine patients. Indication for EVT were anastomotic leakage after esophageal resection or gastrectomy (n = 5) and iatrogenic or spontaneous esophageal perforations (n = 4). The mean number of sponge insertions was six (range, 1-13) with a mean changing interval of 3.5 days (range, 2-5). A successful vacuum therapy for upper intestinal defects was achieved in eight of nine patients (89 %).

CONCLUSION

EVT is a promising approach for postoperative, iatrogenic, or spontaneous lesions of the upper GI tract. If necessary the endoscopic procedure can be combined with operative revision for better control of the local septic focus.

Surgical treatment of esophageal perforations: the importance of a primary repair

PURPOSE

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the outcome after primary repair in comparison to other surgical treatments and the advantage of reinforcing the sutures with an absorbable polyglactin 910 prosthesis.

METHODS

All esophageal perforations surgically managed in this institution from January 1985 through April 2009 (n = 40) were retrospectively analyzed. Patients that underwent surgery with primary sutures (group A, n = 24) were compared with patients that received other surgical procedures (group B, n = 16). The time to initiate treatment (within or after the first 24 h) and if the suture was reinforced with a polyglactin 910 mesh were also analyzed in group A patients.

RESULTS

The outcome was more favorable in group A than group B in terms of time in the intensive care unit (p = 0.005), and rate of reoperation (p = 0.005). There was no difference in the outcome after the primary suture with or without mesh reinforcement, although the rate of fistulization was lower in patients with a mesh (17 vs. 50 %, p = 0.19).

CONCLUSIONS

Primary repair has a better outcome than other surgical treatment, even when performed more than 24 h after symptom onset, but not later than 48 h. Reinforcing the sutures with an absorbable polyglactin 910 mesh therefore seems to improve the outcome.

[Emergency interventions for perforation and bleeding in esophageal cancer patients]

Bleeding and perforation in esophageal cancer patients are rare but associated with a high morbidity and mortality. Because of disappointing results after primary surgical exploration and resection endoscopic intervention was introduced as the primary treatment option with an improved outcome. Aortoesophageal and esophagobronchial fistulas may occur spontaneously or secondary to stenting of the esophagus. They are uncommon but fatal if untreated. The first option is prompt placement of a stent graft as a bridging solution followed by surgical treatment.

[Staged oesophageal reconstruction for benign disease]

OBJECTIVES

To assess morbidity, mortality and quality of life after oesophageal reconstruction in patients with oesophageal exclusion for benign diseases.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 2002 to 2011, 20 of 24 patients with esophageal exclusion due to benign disease underwent a delayed reconstruction. We analyzed morbidity, mortality and health-related quality of life using the SF-36 questionnaire, before and after reconstruction.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were operated (16 men and 4 women) with an average age of 54.5 ± 10.5 years. Main causes of oesophageal disconnection were: 10 cases of caustics ingestion, 3 iatrogenic perforations, 4 anastomotic leaks and 3 cases with Boerhaave syndrome. Fourteen (60%) coloplasties and 6 (25%) gastric interpositions were performed with an average time of 212,2 ± 23.5 days after oesophageal exclusion. Pulmonary complications were the most common postoperative complications (55% patients) and according to the modified Clavien classification were divided into: grade 1 (10%), grade 2 (15%), grade 3a (40%), grade 3b (10%), and grade 4a (10%). The 30-day mortality (grade 5) of the series was 10%. Quality of life after reconstruction improved significantly in all analyzed domains of the SF-36 questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

Deferred oesophageal reconstruction is associated with a high morbidity and a mortality rate of 10%. After reconstruction, the quality of life improved in all the parameters evaluated.

Study of clinical treatment of esophageal foreign body-induced esophageal perforation with lethal complications

Esophageal foreign body-induced esophageal perforation is a lethal complication and its treatment very complex. We had reviewed 1,428 patients with esophageal foreign body, who were hospitalized and treated over the past 25 years. A classification summary was made of 121 patients (of these 1,428 cases) who presented with esophageal foreign body-induced perforation and complicated cervical abscess, mediastinitis, and mediastinal abscess. This summary considered foreign body types, location and lodging duration, complications, and surgical approaches. Among these 121 patients, esophageal foreign bodies in 81 patients were successfully extracted via esophagoscope or fiber optic esophagoscope. Cervical esophageal foreign bodies in 22 patients were extracted by esophagoscope and lateral cervical incision (n = 6) and simple lateral cervical incision (n = 16). Thoracotomy was performed to remove thoracic esophageal foreign bodies in 18 patients with 10 successes and 8 failures. Of the 121 patients, 67 patients with cervical abscess were cured by means of lateral cervical abscess incision and drainage, esophageal stent placement, and esophageal perforation repair with pedicle myolemma or pedicle muscular periosteum flap. 54 patients with mediastinitis and/or abscess were all cured, except one mortality, by means of mediastinotomy and drainage or/and closed-chest drainage, simple esophageal repair, esophageal repair with pedicle myolemma or pedicle muscular periosteum flap and stent placement for esophageal perforation, and esophageal exclusion plus two-stage gastric-pharyngeal anastomosis. In the treatment of esophageal foreign body-induced severe complications, various therapies should be applied simultaneously. Lateral cervical incision should be made immediately to remove the foreign bodies if the foreign body extraction under esophagoscope proves to be a failure after repeated attempts, or esophageal perforation develops during the procedure, or should cervical abscess develop. Mediastinotomy and drainage or/and closed-chest drainage should be carried out as early as possible when mediastinitis and/or mediastinal abscess develops after esophageal foreign body ingestion.

Esophageal salvage with removable covered self-expanding metal stents in the setting of intrathoracic esophageal leakage

BACKGROUND

Intrathoracic contamination from esophageal perforation, staple line dehiscence, or trauma can be a preterminal event. In our institution, covered self-expanding metal stents have been used aggressively in the management of esophageal leak, but their use remains controversial. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of esophageal salvage using stents to assist in the management of intrathoracic esophageal leakage.

METHODS

Over 38 months, 63 patients with esophageal or gastric leaks were evaluated for stenting as primary treatment and identified using a prospective database.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were managed with endoscopic stenting as primary therapy and 30 of those patients required a thoracic intervention after stenting. Seven of these patients required esophageal diversion after stent failure. Thirty-day mortality was 10% in the patients with intrathoracic contamination.

CONCLUSIONS

We suggest that the use of covered self-expanding metal stents in patients with intrathoracic leak after esophageal perforation is safe and offers esophageal salvage in 77% regardless of time of presentation.

Treatment of cervical esophageal perforation caused by foreign bodies

In this article, we reviewed our experience of treatment of cervical esophageal perforation caused by foreign bodies. Between 1980 and 2010, 42 patients were included in this study. There were 18 women and 24 men with a median age of 54 years. We divided the patients into three groups: the patients whose foreign bodies could not be extracted by otolaryngologists using endoscope (n= 7), the patients who had some signs of abscess formation but the foreign bodies had been extracted using endoscope (n= 25), and the patients who had no signs of abscess formation and the foreign bodies had been extracted (n= 10). We treated the patients of the three groups with surgical treatment, drainage alone, and conservative treatment, respectively. The outcome of the current series was favorable. Our experience suggested that most of the cases can be treated conservatively or by drainage alone. If the foreign bodies of the esophagus could not be extracted using endoscope, surgical treatment including the removal of the foreign bodies, primary repair, and drainage should be performed.

Bougie insertion: A common practice with underestimated dangers

INTRODUCTION

Esophageal perforation after bariatric operations is rare. We report two cases of esophageal perforation after bariatric operations indicating the dangers of a common practice - like insertion of esophageal tubes - and we describe our management of that complication.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 56 year old woman who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and a 41 year old woman who underwent laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding respectively. In both operations a bougie has been used and led to esophageal perforation.

DISCUSSION

The insertion of bougie and especially of inflated bougie is a common practice. It is an invasive procedure that in most cases is performed by the anesthesiologist team.

CONCLUSION

Bougie insertion is an invasive procedure with risks and should always be attempted under direct supervision of surgical team or should be inserted by a surgeon.

Esophageal perforation: diagnostic work-up and clinical decision-making in the first 24 hours

Esophageal perforation is a rare and potentially life-threatening condition. Early clinical suspicion and imaging is important for case management to achieve a good outcome. However, recent studies continue to report high morbidity and mortality greater than 20% from esophageal perforation. At least half of the perforations are iatrogenic, mostly related to endoscopic instrumentation used in the upper gastrointestinal tract, while about a third are spontaneous perforations. Surgical treatment remains an important option for many patients, but a non-operative approach, with or without use of an endoscopic stent or placement of internal or external drains, should be considered when the clinical situation allows for a less invasive approach. The rarity of this emergency makes it difficult for a physician to obtain extensive individual clinical experience; it is also challenging to obtain firm scientific evidence that informs patient management and clinical decision-making. Improved attention to non-specific symptoms and signs and early diagnosis based on imaging may translate into better outcomes for this group of patients, many of whom are elderly with significant comorbidity.

Esophageal perforation: diagnostic work-up and clinical decision-making in the first 24 hours

Esophageal perforation is a rare and potentially life-threatening condition. Early clinical suspicion and imaging is important for case management to achieve a good outcome. However, recent studies continue to report high morbidity and mortality greater than 20% from esophageal perforation. At least half of the perforations are iatrogenic, mostly related to endoscopic instrumentation used in the upper gastrointestinal tract, while about a third are spontaneous perforations. Surgical treatment remains an important option for many patients, but a non-operative approach, with or without use of an endoscopic stent or placement of internal or external drains, should be considered when the clinical situation allows for a less invasive approach. The rarity of this emergency makes it difficult for a physician to obtain extensive individual clinical experience; it is also challenging to obtain firm scientific evidence that informs patient management and clinical decision-making. Improved attention to non-specific symptoms and signs and early diagnosis based on imaging may translate into better outcomes for this group of patients, many of whom are elderly with significant comorbidity.

Medical management of iatrogenic esophageal perforations

OPINION STATEMENT

Esophageal perforation is an uncommon, potentially disastrous occurrence with high mortality rates even when managed with surgery. Over the past few decades, several case series have shown that nonoperative management is a feasible option in some patients, although the criteria for selecting such patients are neither firmly established nor accepted by all those who manage these critical patients. The decision to manage a patient without surgery should be made collaboratively with a surgeon. No single criterion, with the possible exception of sepsis and shock, mandates surgical management. Randomized, prospective studies comparing surgical and nonsurgical therapy have not been performed. Factors that can affect the decision to proceed nonoperatively include the perforation's site and size, the patient's underlying comorbidities, and the patient's hemodynamic status on presentation. Healthy patients with small, contained perforations who present without sepsis tend to be the best candidates for nonoperative management. Intravenous antibiotics and cessation of oral intake should be instituted immediately, even before confirming the diagnosis. Mediastinal fluid collections and pleural effusions often coexist with esophageal perforations and must be managed concomitantly. Percutaneously placed drains are an important adjunct to therapy when collections are identified. Endoscopic stenting has been introduced as a means to seal the perforation. After embarking on a nonoperative course, patients still may deteriorate and require surgery, so close follow-up is warranted for every patient. When proper nonoperative management strategies are followed, outcomes have been shown to be at least equivalent to those of surgical management in most series. In this review, the principles of patient selection and medical therapy for iatrogenic esophageal perforations are discussed.

Management of intrathoracic oesophageal perforation: analysis of 16 cases

Intrathoracic oesophageal perforation remains a life-threatening lesion that requires early diagnosis and the appropriate intervention in order to reduce morbidity and mortality. Management depends largely on the cause of the perforation, the integrity of the oesophagus and the time lapse between the perforation and the commencement of treatment. Our aim was to evaluate the management options that were employed in the treatment of patients with oesophageal perforation and the outcome. The records of 16 patients (11 males and 5 females) who had been operated on from 1994–2009 were retrospectively reviewed. Their ages ranged between 2–66 years (mean 36.4). Malignant oesophageal perforations were excluded from the study. The aetiology was iatrogenic in 10 (62.5%), foreign bodies five (31.2%) and spontaneous one (6.2%). Six patients (37.5%) presented within 24 h of their injury and 10 (62.5%) presented after 24 h. Thoracotomy and intrathoracic primary repair was possible in five (31.2%) cases. Oesophagectomy, cervical oesophagostomy and feeding gastrostomy were carried out in 11 (68.8%). Oesophageal substitution was by colon, routed retrosternally. One patient (6.2%) died after oesophagectomy from overwhelming sepsis. Oesophageal perforation is a life-threatening condition. Early diagnosis and the institution of prompt and appropriate treatment ensure good outcome.

Aggressive surgical treatment in late-diagnosed esophageal perforation: a report of 11 cases

Introduction. Esophageal perforation is a relatively uncommon and lethal disease usually resulting from endoscopic procedures. Delay in the diagnosis and treatment occurs in more than 50% of cases, leading to a mortality rate of 40% to 60%, but this rate decreases is 10%–25% if treatment is carried out within 24 hours of perforation. Case Presentation. To analyze the characteristics, etiology, site of perforation, presentation, time interval till diagnosis, treatment and outcome of patients with esophageal perforation. Over a five-year period, from October 2004 through March 2009, 11 patients with esophageal perforation were referred to the division of thoracic surgery of a tertiary referral hospital. In eight patients, perforations were thoracic with delayed diagnosis for at least 48 hours. Two patients had cervical esophageal perforation, and one patient had early-diagnosed Boerhaave's syndrome. Eight patients are alive after followup for a period ranging from eight months to five years. In the remaining three patients, cancer was the underlying disease and the reason of death. Conclusion. No patient with esophageal perforation should be deprived from surgical repair due to delayed diagnosis. All, except preterminal patients, should undergo exploration after resuscitation, and appropriate treatment should be carried out depending on the findings during operation. Aggressive treatment is necessary in the case of established mediastinitis.

Impact of endoscopic assessment and treatment on operative and non-operative management of acute oesophageal perforation

BACKGROUND

Surgeons have not typically utilized an endoscopic approach for diagnosis and management of acute oesophageal perforation, mainly due to fears of increased mediastinal contamination. This study assessed the evolution of endoscopic approaches and their effect on outcomes over time in acute oesophageal perforation.

METHODS

All patients with documented acute oesophageal perforation between 1990 and 2009 were enrolled prospectively in an Institutional Review Board-approved database.

RESULTS

Of 81 patients who presented during the study period, 52 had upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for diagnosis alone (12 patients; 23 per cent) or as a component of acute management (40 patients; 77 per cent). Use of endoscopy increased from four of 13 patients in the first 5 years of the study to 20 of 24 patients in the final 5 years. Endoscopy was used in conjunction with surgery in 28 patients, of whom 21 underwent primary repair, three had resection, and one a diversion; 12 patients in this group had hybrid operations (combination of surgical and endoscopic management). Primary endoscopic treatment was used in 15 patients (29 per cent), most commonly involving stent placement (7). Of those having endoscopy, complication rates improved (from 3 of 4 to 8 of 20 patients), as did mean length of stay (from 21·8 to 13·4 days) between the initial and final 5 years of the study. There were two deaths (4 per cent). Of 21 patients who had both endoscopic assessment and management in the operating room, endoscopy identified additional pathology in ten, leading to a change in management plan in five patients.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopy is a safe and important component of the management of acute oesophageal perforation. It provides additional information that modifies treatment, and its wider use should result in improved outcomes.

Spontaneous rupture of middle thoracic esophagus: thoracoscopic treatment

Spontaneous rupture of the esophagus (so-called Boerhaave's syndrome) is considered a medical emergency. It carries a significant mortality rate and requires prompt treatment. The treatment of choice involves surgical repair of the esophageal defect, usually accomplished via laparotomy, thoracotomy, or both to accomplish esophageal repair and mediastinal debridement. We have treated an elderly patient with severe comorbidities with a minimally invasive approach, achieving a successful complete repair. Long-term endoscopic and radiologic follow-up confirm the good results.