Management of a tracheoesophageal fistula with a silicone-covered self-expanding metal stent

Changing epidemiology of esophageal stent placement for dysphagia: a decade of trends and the impact of benign indications

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In addition to managing malignant obstruction, esophageal stents (ESs) have evolved to address various benign etiologies of dysphagia. We sought to evaluate national trends and changes in practice of ES placement for both benign and malignant etiologies in hospitalized patients with dysphagia.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample (2003-2013) was used to include all adult inpatients (≥18 years of age) with endoscopy-guided ES placement for a symptom of dysphagia. Multivariable analyses for indications that impact temporal trends (3 time periods: 2003-2005, 2006-2009, and 2010-2013) and for hospital outcomes were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 7198 ESs were deployed endoscopically in hospitalized patients with dysphagia. Compared with malignant etiologies, there was a significant increase in ES placement for benign conditions (2013 vs 2003: 32.7% vs 14.5%, respectively; P < .001). Multivariable analysis using 2003 to 2005 as a reference showed that patients with benign etiologies for dysphagia predominantly contributed to the increase of ES placement during the most recent time period (2010-2013: odds ratio, 2.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-3.13). Multivariable analysis of hospital outcomes revealed no differences in inpatient mortality, duration of hospital stay, and hospital costs between malignant and benign indications.

CONCLUSIONS

In the preceding decade, ES placement for hospitalized patients with dysphagia has increased, driven largely by an over 8-fold rise in stent placement for benign indications. These findings warrant continued efforts to improve stent technology to decrease the risk of migration and review practice guidelines involving ES placement for benign etiologies.

Patient Outcomes After Stent Failure for the Treatment of Acute Esophageal Perforation

BACKGROUND

Esophageal stent placement for acute esophageal perforation has become part of the treatment algorithm for many thoracic surgery programs. Despite high success rates, there are patients for which stent placement is not successful. This investigation summarizes the outcomes of a relatively large group of such patients.

METHODS

Patients who underwent esophageal stent placement for an acute perforation but required conversion to another form of therapy were identified from a prospectively collected institutional database. Excluded were patients whose perforation was associated with a malignancy. Patient demographics, operative and nonoperative invasive procedures, morbidities, mortality, and 6-month follow-up after discharge were reviewed.

RESULTS

Between 2008 and 2015, 26 patients who failed to seal their esophageal leak after stent placement were identified. Eighteen (69%) of these patients required an operative repair with primary closure of the perforation. Four (15%) primary repairs had a persistent leak controlled with subsequent stent placement. Four (15%) patients required an esophagectomy with cervical esophagostomy. Three patients (11%), because of comorbid conditions, were referred for hospice care. One patient (3%) refused operative repair and developed a chronic fistula that resolved with subsequent stent placement.

CONCLUSIONS

Esophageal stent placement continues to be a safe and effective treatment for acute esophageal perforation. Patients whose perforation does not seal with initial stent placement can be treated with primary surgical repair or esophagectomy without increasing their morbidity or mortality or compromising their prognosis.

Endoscopic management of esophageal leaks

Traditionally, gold standard treatment for an acute esophageal perforation has been operative repair. Over the past two decades, there has been a paradigm shift towards the use of esophageal stents. Recent advances in biomaterial allowed a new generation of stents to be manufactured that combined (I) a non-permeable covering; (II) radial force sufficient to occlude a transmural esophageal injury and (III) improved ease of removability. The amalgamation of these developments set the stage for utilizing esophageal stents as part of the management algorithm of an acute esophageal perforation. This provides a safe and less invasive treatment route in lieu of direct primary repair and its well-documented significant failure rate. Esophageal stent placement for failed operative repair or esophageal leaks also had the potential to minimize the need for esophageal resection and diversion. When included in a multimodality hybrid treatment protocol, esophageal stents can optimize healing success rates and minimize the risks of adverse complications. This review summarizes the modern history of esophageal stent use in the treatment of esophageal perforation as well as the evidenced based recommendations for the use of esophageal stent placement in the treatment of acute esophageal perforation.

Expandable metallic stents should not be used in the treatment of benign esophageal strictures

Expandable metallic stents have become popular in recent years for the treatment of esophageal strictures. While they are undoubtedly of great value in the palliation of malignant strictures and tracheo-esophageal fistulas, there is concern over their use for the treatment of benign diseases. We report three cases, in which such problems were seen following stent insertion for benign esophageal strictures. All three patients developed further strictures above the stents, one was complicated by a tracheo-esophageal fistula and two stents (in one patient) migrated distally into the stomach. Two of the patients underwent subsequent esophageal surgery. In both cases, this proved extremely difficult and hazardous because of the intense fibrotic reaction induced by the stents. Expandable mesh stents should not be used for the treatment of benign esophageal strictures without careful consideration of the potential problems, which can include rendering the problem inoperable.

Expandable metallic esophageal stents in benign disease: a cause for concern

Over a 2-year period at our institution, 6 patients underwent metallic stent treatment, 5 for malignant conditions and 1 for a benign condition of the esophagus. The use of expandable metallic stents for benign strictures has paralleled malignant indications but is limited and less understood from a clinical standpoint. A review of current literature in the treatment of benign strictures is presented. Treatment of benign strictures is associated with high morbidity and mortality as demonstrated by the cumulative experience of 21 patients. Migration, hyperplastic tissue obstruction at the terminal ends, reflux, and complications of perforation occur at a prohibitive rate. We conclude that expandable metallic stents should be reserved for palliative treatment of esophageal malignant obstructions and tracheoesophageal fistulas. Pharmacological management, necessary dilatations and operative corrections (antireflux procedures, esophagectomy) are recommended treatments for benign strictures.