Safety and effectiveness of endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure for esophageal defects: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Pull-through endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure therapy for complicated leaks of the gastrointestinal tract: Novel technique

Background and study aims

Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure (EVAC) of postsurgical leaks is an increasingly applied technique. Precise intracavitary sponge placement is technically challenging. Here, we describe a novel EVAC therapy using a combined external and endoluminal, pull-through technique.

Patients and methods

In this retrospective cohort study, we included all patients treated with pull-through EVAC for post-surgery leaks. During endoscopy, the proximal tip of the percutaneous drainage was visualized within the extraluminal abscess cavity, grasped with forceps, and pulled out orally while maintaining the distal end of the drainage above skin level. A foam sponge was fixed to the tip of the percutaneous drainage and sutured to a gastric tube at the other end. The sponge was placed in the cavity by pulling at the percutaneous drainage. Finally, the gastric probe was channeled nasally and suction was applied. Reinterventions comprised pulling the gastric tube, exchanging the sponge, and re-positioning, as described above. Therapy was stopped after closure or complete epithelialization of the leakage.

Results

Overall, seven patients were included between 2021 and 2023. Median duration of pull-through EVAC therapy was 30 days (interquartile range [IQR] 11-37 days) and the median number of endoscopic interventions was six (IQR 4-10). Technical and clinical success was achieved in all (100%) and in six of seven patients (85.7%), respectively. In total, one major bleeding complication associated with EVAC therapy occurred (14.3%).

Conclusions

Pull-through EVAC therapy is safe and effective in patients with large and challenging postsurgical leaks of the upper gastrointestinal tract.

Efficacy of endoscopic vacuum therapy in esophageal luminal defects: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure (EVAC) is a novel technique used to repair esophageal perforation and leaks. Varying data have been reported on the overall success rate of EVAC. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of the available data on the clinical success rate of EVAC.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for publications addressing the efficacy of EVAC in esophageal luminal defects. Pooling was conducted using both fixed and random-effects models. The overall clinical success of EVAC therapy was considered the primary outcome, whereas, overall complication rates, need for adjunct therapy, and mortality were considered secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 366 patients were included in the study. On pooled analysis, the mean age was 66 years with 68.32% of patients being men. Overall pooled clinical success rate of EVAC therapy was 87.95%. Upon subgroup analysis, the pooled clinical success rate of postsurgical anastomotic leak and transmural esophageal perforation were found to be 86.57% and 88.89%, respectively. The all-cause hospital mortality was 14% and 4.2% in patients with esophageal perforation and EVAC, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that EVAC therapy has a high overall clinical success rate, with low mortality. EVAC therapy seems to be a promising procedure with excellent outcomes in patients with luminal esophageal defects.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy: pitfalls, tips and tricks, insights, and perspectives

This article provides a comprehensive review of the use of endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) in the management of transmural gastrointestinal (GI) defects (TGIDs) and its future perspectives, such as pre-emptive EVT and novel indications, including GI bleeding and large gastroduodenal ulcers management. This review is based on the available literature data and personal experience to demystify the mentioned limitations of EVT as technical difficulties related to the procedure, possible patients' complaints, and institutions' concerns, by sharing several tips and tricks to overcome EVT-related challenges that may discourage endoscopists from using this live-saving technique, and consequently, restricting patients to receive this therapy, which may lead to undesired outcomes. Several factors, such as placement techniques, EVT type selection, management during its use, EVT system exchanges, device removal, type of anesthesia, and how to avoid EVT-related adverse events are described in detail. Additionally, this review discusses good ways to promote effective communication with patients and relatives, surgeons, and multidisciplinary team. EVT possesses a unique mechanism of action including macro/micro deformation, changes in perfusion (stimulating angioneogenesis), exudate control, and bacterial clearance, promoting healing. EVT has an adequate safety profile and higher clinical success rate compared to any other endoscopic therapy for TGID. Additionally, pre-emptive EVT and its novel indications are promising due to its satisfactory effectiveness in initial studies. Therefore, detailing some practical solutions obtained by years of experience may collaborate to widespread EVT adoption, providing less-invasive treatment for several critical conditions to more patients worldwide.

Management of esophageal anastomotic leaks, a systematic review and network meta-analysis

There is currently no consensus as to how to manage esophageal anastomotic leaks. Intervention with endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure (EVAC), stenting, reoperation, and conservative management have all been mooted as potential options. To conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the optimal management strategy for esophageal anastomotic leaks. A systematic review was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines with extension for NMA. NMA was performed using R packages and Shiny. In total, 12 retrospective studies were included, which included 511 patients. Of the 449 patients for whom data regarding sex was available, 371 (82.6%) were male, 78 (17.4%) were female. The average age of patients was 62.6 years (standard deviation 10.2). The stenting cohort included 245 (47.9%) patients. The EVAC cohort included 123 (24.1%) patients. The conservative cohort included 87 (17.0%) patients. The reoperation cohort included 56 (10.9%) patients. EVAC had a significantly decreased complication rate compared to stenting (odds ratio 0.23 95%, confidence interval [CI] 0.09;0.58). EVAC had a significantly lower mortality rate than stenting (odds ratio 0.43, 95% CI 0.21; 0.87). Reoperation was used in significantly larger leaks than stenting (mean difference 14.66, 95% CI 4.61;24.70). The growing use of EVAC as a first-line intervention in esophageal anastomotic leaks should continue given its proven effectiveness and significant reduction in both complication and mortality rates. Surgical management is often necessary for significantly larger leaks and will likely remain an effective option in uncontained leaks with systemic features.

Multicenter study on the incidence and treatment of mediastinal leaks after esophagectomy (MuMeLe 2)

BACKGROUND

Management of mediastinal anastomotic leaks (MALs) after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy includes conservative, endoscopic, or surgical management. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVAC) is becoming a routine approach for MALs, although the outcomes have not been defined. This study aimed to describe the incidence, treatment, and outcomes of MALs in patients who underwent esophagectomy in 3 Italian high-volume centers that routinely use EVAC for MAL.

METHODS

Patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy between September 2018 and March 2023 were included.

RESULTS

A total of 681 patients underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, of whom 88 had MAL. The MAL rates for open, minimally invasive, and robotic esophagectomies were 11.5%, 13.4%, and 14.8%, respectively. Global and specific 30- and 90-day mortality rates for MAL were 0.9% and 2.1% and 6.8% and 15.9%, respectively. Nonoperative management (NOM) as the primary treatment was chosen for 62 patients. EVAC was the most common NOM (62.9%), and the most common operative management (OM) was anastomotic redo (53.8%). Diversion was the OM for 7 patients, of whom 3 patients died. Primary treatment proved successful in 40 patients. Among them, EVAC alone was successful in 35.9% of patients. Globally, endoscopic treatment, including EVAC, was successful in 79.0% of NOM and 55.7% of MALs. NOM and OM were chosen as secondary treatments for 27 and 10 patients, respectively. Secondary treatment proved successful in 21 patients.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of MALs after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy is approximately 13%. Endoscopic techniques have a success rate of almost 80%, with EVAC representing a significant part of this treatment process.

Multi-modality management of defects in the gastrointestinal tract: Where the endoscope meets the scalpel: Endoscopic vacuum therapy in the upper gastrointestinal tract

BACKGROUND

Transmural defects in the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract, such as anastomotic leakage and oesophageal perforations, are associated with significant morbidity and mortality risks. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) is an efficient and safe treatment option for these patients. With the growing use of EVT in the upper GI tract, it is important to share expertise on the topic.

AIM

This review explores the emerging role of endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) as treatment for transmural defects in the upper GI tract. An overview of the mechanism and procedures, outcomes in current literature and challenges of implementation and application are discussed.

CONCLUSION

EVT exhibits great efficacy and safety for the treatment of transmural defects in the upper GI tract. Current use of EVT is mostly experience-based, emphasizing the importance of sharing expertise and performing research to unlock its full potential.

Replogle Modified Endoscopic Vacuum-Assisted Closure (EVAC) Therapy: A New Strategy to Treat Anastomotic Leakage and Esophageal Perforation

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) and esophageal perforation are life-threatening complications following surgery or endoscopic dilations. "Replogle modified EVAC therapy" consists of placing a Replogle tube directly into the lumen or within an abscess cavity and remove by suction all intra-cavity fluids and secretion with a continuous low-pressure suction, promoting granulation tissue proliferation, thereby gradually decreasing the cavity size. The aim of our study was to evaluate the technical feasibility, safety, and efficacy of this technique in pediatric patients.

METHODS

A retrospective review charts of consecutive pediatric patients that were treated with "Replogle modified EVAC therapy" at our pediatric referral center between 2013 and 2022 was conducted. The clinical, endoscopic, radiological, and surgical information and data of patients were collected and revised as well as their follow-up and outcomes.

RESULTS

Ten patients (6/10 male; mean age: 7.8 y.o., range: 1.1-18 y.o.) were treated using the "Replogle modified EVAC therapy". Four out of ten patients developed esophageal perforations after endoscopic procedures. Six out of the ten enrolled patients had AL complications after surgical operations. All patients were successfully treated. There were no technical failures or complications with device placement. Mean treatment duration was 16 days (range 7-41 days). No additional treatment was needed for complete leak resolution.

CONCLUSIONS

"Replogle modified EVAC therapy" represents a promising and mini-invasive method to treat esophageal perforations and post-surgical leak in the paediatric age group. In our experience, the use of this technique was safe, effective, and particularly well suited also in complex paediatric patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Effective and alternative treatment of anastomotic leak after gastrojejunal bypass: endoluminal vacuum therapy

Anastomotic leak (AL) after with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) has a morbidity rate to 53% and it can be potentially lethal (mortality rate from 0.5 to 10%). In these cases, surgery is usually a challenge, so in recent years minimally invasive endoscopic treatment is gaining ground. Endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVAC) is a promising treatment that is being used in esophagogastric and rectal surgery for the management of AL. We present the case of a patient on his 5th postoperative day of bariatric surgery (RYGB) with an acute abdomen. He was diagnosed of dehiscence of gastrojejunal anastomosis and he needed urgent surgery twice. Subsequently, in control CT, a new anastomotic leak is evidenced. However, given the clinical stability of the patient, it was decided to start EVAC type ESO-Sponge® placed by endoscopy. A total of 4 changes are made every 3-4 days with a total duration of treatment of 15 days. EVAC was removed when the defect presented a 1 mm sized.

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.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic leakage after upper gastrointestinal surgery

BACKGROUND

Recently, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) was introduced as treatment for anastomotic leakage after upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. The aim of this study was to describe the initial experience with EVT for anastomotic leakage after upper GI surgery in a tertiary referral center.

METHODS

Patients treated with EVT for anastomotic leakage after upper GI surgery were included retrospectively (January 2018-June 2021) and prospectively (June 2021-October 2021). The primary end point was the EVT success rate. Secondary end points included mortality and adverse events.

RESULTS

38 patients were included (31 men; mean age 66 years): 27 had undergone an esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction and 11 a total gastrectomy with esophagojejunal anastomosis. EVT was successful in 28 patients (74 %, 95 %CI 57 %-87 %). In 10 patients, EVT failed: deceased owing to radiation pneumonitis (n = 1), EVT-associated complications (n = 2), and defect closure not achieved (n = 7). Mean duration of successful EVT was 33 days, with a median of six EVT-related endoscopies. Median hospital stay was 45 days.

CONCLUSION

This initial experience with EVT for anastomotic leakage after upper GI surgery demonstrated a success rate of 74 %. EVT is a promising therapy that could prevent further major surgery. More experience with the technique and its indications will likely improve success rates in the future.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for esophageal perforation: a multicenter retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND : Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) is a novel treatment for esophageal perforations. This study aimed to describe initial experience with EVT of esophageal perforations due to iatrogenic cause, Boerhaave syndrome, or other perforations not related to prior upper gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS : Data from patients treated with EVT for esophageal perforation at five hospitals in three European countries, between January 2018 and October 2021, were retrospectively collected. The primary end point was successful defect closure by EVT, with or without the use of other endoscopic treatment modalities. Secondary end points included mortality and adverse events. RESULTS : 27 patients were included (median age 71 years). The success rate was 89 % (24/27, 95 %CI 77-100). EVT failed in three patients: two deceased during EVT (septic embolic stroke, pulmonary embolism) and one underwent esophagectomy due to a persisting defect. Two adverse events occurred: one iatrogenic defect expansion during sponge exchange and one hemorrhage during sponge removal. Median treatment duration was 12 days (interquartile range [IQR] 6-16) with 1 sponge exchange (IQR 1-3). CONCLUSION : EVT is a promising organ-preserving treatment for esophageal perforations, with a success rate of 89 %. More experience with the technique and indications will likely improve success rates.

Homemade endoscopic vacuum therapy device for the management of transmural gastrointestinal defects

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) possesses a unique mechanism of action providing a less invasive alternative for the management of transmural gastrointestinal defects (TGID). This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of a novel homemade EVT (H-EVT) for the treatment of TGID.

METHODS

Retrospective multicenter study including patients who underwent H-EVT for TGID between January 2019 and January 2022. Main outcomes included technical and clinical success as well as safety outcomes. Subgroup analyses were included by defect location and classification. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine predictors for successful closure.

RESULTS

A total of 144 patients were included. Technical success was achieved in all patients, with clinical success achieved in 88.89% after a mean of 3.49 H-EVT exchanges over an average of 23.51 days. After excluding 10 cases wherein it was not possible to achieve negative pressure, successful closure occurred in 95.52% of patients. Time to clinical success was less for defects caused by endoscopic (hazard ratio [HR] 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-1.20) compared to surgical procedures and for patients with simultaneous intracavitary and intraluminal H-EVT placement (HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.55-0.91). Location and classification of defect did not impact clinical success rate. Simultaneous placement of both an intraluminal and intracavitary H-EVT (odds ratio 3.08; 95% CI 1.19-7.95) was a significant predictor of clinical success. Three device-related adverse events (2.08%) occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the H-EVT is feasible, safe, and effective for the management of TGID.

Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy of Upper Gastrointestinal Anastomotic Leaks: How to Deal with the Challenges (with Video)

Anastomotic leaks after gastrointestinal surgery have an important impact on surgical outcomes because of the high morbidity and mortality rates. Multiple treatment options exist requiring an individualized patient-tailored treatment plan after multidisciplinary discussion. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) is a novel treatment option that is nowadays recognized as an effective and useful endoscopic approach to treat leaks or perforations in both the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract. EVT has a very good safety profile. However, it is a time-consuming endeavour requiring engagement from the endoscopist and understanding from the patient. To the unexperienced, the EVT technique may be prone to several hurdles which may deter endoscopists from using it and depriving patients from a potentially life-saving therapeutic option. The current review highlights the possible difficulties of the EVT procedure and aims to provide some practical solutions to facilitate its use in daily clinical practice. Personal tips and tricks are shared to overcome the pre-, intra- and post-procedural hurdles. An instructive video of the procedure helps to illustrate the technique of EVT.

Comparison of long-term quality of life outcomes between endoscopic vacuum therapy and other treatments for upper gastrointestinal leaks

BACKGROUND

While endoscopic vacuum assisted closure (EVAC) therapy is a validated treatment for gastrointestinal leaks, its impact on long-term quality of life (QoL) is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of successful EVAC management on long-term QoL outcomes.

METHODS

An institutional review board approved prospectively maintained database was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients undergoing treatment for gastrointestinal leaks between June 2012 and July 2022. The Short-Form 36 (SF-36) survey was used to assess QoL. Patients were contacted by telephone and sent the survey electronically. QoL outcomes between patients who underwent successful EVAC therapy and those who required conventional treatment (CT) were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients (17 EVAC; 27 CT) completed the survey and were included in our analysis. All included patients had foregut leaks with sleeve gastrectomy being the most common sentinel operation (n = 20). The mean time from the sentinel operation was 3.8 years and 4.8 years for the EVAC and CT groups, respectively. When evaluating long-term QoL, the EVAC group scored higher in all QoL domains when compared to the CT group with physical functioning (87.3 vs 69.3, p = 0.04), role limitations due to physical health (84.1 vs 45.7, p = 0.02), energy/fatigue (60.0 vs 40.9, p = 0.04), and social functioning (86.2 vs 64.1, p = 0.04) reaching statistical significance. Overall, patients who achieved organ preservation via successful EVAC therapy scored higher in all domains with role limitations due to physical health (p = 0.04) being statistically significant. In a multivariable regression analysis, increased age and a history of prior abdominal surgery at the time of the sentinel operation were patient characteristics that negatively impacted QoL outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Patients with gastrointestinal leaks successfully managed by EVAC therapy have better long-term QoL outcomes when compared to patients undergoing other treatments.

Clinical implantation of 92 VACStents in the upper gastrointestinal tract of 50 patients-applicability and safety analysis of an innovative endoscopic concept

Introduction

Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has emerged as a promising treatment option for upper gastrointestinal wall defects, offering benefits such as evacuation of secretions and removal of wound debris by suction, and reduction and healing of wound cavities to improve clinical outcomes. In contrast, covered stents have a high rate of migration and lack functional drainage, while endoluminal EVT devices obstruct the GI tract. The VACStent is a novel device that combines the benefits of EVT and stent placement. Its design features a fully covered Nitinol-stent within a polyurethane sponge cylinder, enabling EVT while maintaining stent patency.

Methods

This study analyzes the pooled data from three different prospective study cohorts to assess the safe practicality of VACStent placement, complete leak coverage, and effective suction-treatment of esophageal leaks. By pooling the data, the study aims to provide a broader base for analysis.

Results

In total, trans-nasal derivation of the catheter, suction and drainage of secretion via vacuum pump were performed without any adversity. In the pooled study cohort of 92 VACStent applications, the mean stent indwelling time was 5.2 days (range 2-8 days) without any dislocation of the device. Removal of the VACStent was done without complication, in one case the sponge was lost but subsequently fully preserved. Minor local erosions and bleeding and one subsequent hemostasis were recorded unfrequently during withdrawal of the device (5.4%, 5/92) but no perforation or pressure ulcer. Despite a high heterogeneity regarding primary disease and pretreatments a cure rate of 76% (38/50 patients) could be achieved.

Discussion

In summary, insertion and release procedure was regarded as easy and simple with a low potential of dislocation. The VACStent was well tolerated by the patient while keeping the drainage function of the sponge achieving directly a wound closure by continuous suction and improving the healing process. The implantation of the VACStent provides a promising new procedure for improved clinical treatment in various indications of the upper gastrointestinal wall, which should be validated in larger clinical studies.Clinical Trial Registration: Identifier [DRKS00016048 and NCT04884334].

Preemptive endoluminal vacuum therapy with the VACStent—A pilot study to reduce anastomotic leakage after Ivor Lewis hybrid esophagectomy

Introduction

Endoscopic treatment by vacuum therapy (EVT) or covered stents has emerged as an improved treatment option for upper gastrointestinal wall defects and is regarded as an improved treatment option for anastomotic leakage (AL) after esophagectomy. However, endoluminal EVT devices may lead to obstruction of the GI tract; and a high rate of migration and missing functional drainage has been shown for covered stents. The recently developed VACStent, a combination of a fully covered stent within a polyurethane sponge cylinder may overcome these issues allowing EVT while stent passage is still open. Initial clinical applications have demonstrated efficacy, practicability and safety in the treatment of esophageal leaks (AL).

Methods

In this pilot study, 9 patients with high-risk anastomosis after neoadjuvant therapy undergoing hybrid esophagectomy received the VACStent in a preemptive setting for the assessment of the reduction of the AL rate, postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Results

Technical success of the application of the VACStent® was achieved in all interventions. One patient experienced anastomotic leakage 10 days after esophagectomy and was successfully treated with two consecutive VACStents and a VAC Sponge. In summary, mortality in-hospital was 0% and anastomotic healing was uneventful without septic episodes. No severe device-related adverse events (SADE) nor significant local bleeding or erosion could be observed. Oral intake of liquids or food was documented in all patients. The device handling was regarded uncomplicated.

Discussion

The preemptive application of the VACStent offers a promising new option for improved clinical treatment avoiding of critical situations in hybrid esophagectomy, which should be validated in a large clinical study.

Vacuum-stent: A combination of endoscopic vacuum therapy and an intraluminal stent for treatment of esophageal transmural defects

Introduction

Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has gained a greater role in management of transmural defects in the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract, including anastomotic leakage and esophageal perforation (e.g. Boerhaave syndrome and iatrogenic causes). The vacuum-stent is a new treatment modality, combining the benefits of EVT and an intraluminal stent.

Patients and methods

This prospective case series describes the first ten cases of a transmural defect in the upper GI tract treated with a vacuum-stent in a tertiary referral center. All patients signed informed consent for prospective registration of relevant data on treatment and outcomes in a specially designed database. Outcome parameters were successful closure of the defect, number of endoscopies, duration of treatment and adverse events.

Results

In total, ten patients treated with a vacuum-stent were included. Eight patients had anastomotic leakage after esophageal resection, of whom six were treated with vacuum-sponge and vacuum-stent, and two with vacuum-stent only. One patient had Boerhaave syndrome, treated with vacuum-sponge and vacuum-stent, and one had an iatrogenic perforation during pneumodilation for achalasia, treated with vacuum-stent only. Success rate was 100%, requiring a median of 5 (IQR 3-12) EVT-related endoscopies with a treatment course of median 18 (IQR 12-59) days. One patient developed an esophageal stricture, but no other vacuum-stent related adverse events were observed.

Conclusion

The vacuum-stent, which combines benefits of EVT and an intraluminal stent, shows great feasibility and efficacy in treatment of transmural defects in the upper GI tract. Future studies should point out whether this device can prevent major (re-)surgery in these patients.

The VACStent trial: combined treatment of esophageal leaks by covered stent and endoscopic vacuum therapy

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatment of esophageal leaks, mostly by covered stents or endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT), has largely improved the clinical outcome in the last decade. However, both techniques suffer from significant limitations. Covered stents are hampered by a high rate of migration and missing functional drainage, whereas endoluminal EVT devices are limited by obstruction of the GI tract. The new design of the VACStent makes it a fully covered stent within a polyurethane sponge cylinder, allowing EVT while stent passage is still open. Initial clinical applications have demonstrated the fundamental concept of the VACStent.

METHOD

A prospective multicenter open-label study was performed with the primary endpoint safe practicality, complete leak coverage, and effective suction-treatment of esophageal leaks. Secondary endpoints were prevention of septic conditions, successful leak healing, and complications, in particular stent-migration, local erosions and bleeding.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients with different, mostly postoperative anastomotic leaks were enrolled in three centers. A total of 41 VACStents were implanted. The mean number of VACStents per patient was 2.7, with a mean duration of VACStent treatment of 15 days. The primary endpoint was met in all VACStent applications (41/41 implants), resulting in a leak healing rate of 80% (12/15 patients). Septic episodes were prevented in 93% (14/15 patients) and there was no mortality. There were no severe device-related adverse events (SADE) nor significant local bleeding or erosion. Minor stent-dislocation and migration, respectively, was observed in 7%. Oral intake of liquids or food was documented in 87% (13/15 patients). One anastomotic stenosis was seen during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

VACStent treatment is a safe and effective treatment in esophageal leaks which can be covered by the sponge cylinder. Its application was described as easy and resembling that of conventional GI stents, with an impressive clinical success rate comparable to EVT outcomes. The VACStent offers a new option for clinical treatment of critical situations in esophageal perforations and anastomotic sutureline failures.

The Etiology, Diagnosis, and Management of Esophageal Perforation

BACKGROUND

Esophageal perforation is a serious and potentially life-threatening medical emergency. Given multiple etiologies and varying clinical presentations of the perforated esophagus, the diagnosis is commonly delayed, complicating expeditious and optimal intervention.

METHODS

We thoroughly reviewed the latest literature on the subject and herein describe the various treatment strategies in varying settings.

RESULTS

Treatment depends on multiple factors including the cause and location of the perforation, the time interval between the inciting event and presentation to the managing clinician, the overall medical stability of the patient, comorbidities including pre-existent esophageal pathology or prior foregut operations, and both the location and extent of extra-esophageal fluid collections. Because of these various considerations, determining the best diagnostic and therapeutic approach requires considerable clinical experience and judgment on the part of the physician. Management principles include (1) adequate fluid resuscitation; (2) expeditious administration of appropriate broad-spectrum antibiotics; (3) repair, occlusion, exclusion, diversion, or exteriorization of the perforation site; (4) drainage of extraluminal fluid collections; (5) relief of distal obstruction; and (6) nutritional support.

CONCLUSIONS

For decades, operative intervention has been the mainstay of therapy for esophageal perforation. More recently, endoscopic therapies, including stenting, clipping, suturing, or endoscopic vacuum therapy, have been introduced, expanding the clinician's therapeutic armamentarium while supplanting surgical approaches in many cases. With further experience and introduction of novel therapies, the management of esophageal perforation undoubtedly will continue to evolve.