The Use of Esophageal Stents in the Management of Postoperative Fistulas-Current Status, Clinical Outcomes and Perspectives-Review

Esophageal fistula remains one of the main postoperative complications, with the treatment often requiring the use of stents. This article reviews the updates on the use of endoscopic stents for the treatment of postoperative esophageal leakage in terms of indications, types of stents used, efficiency, specific complications and perspectives.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched the PubMed and MEDLINE databases for the keywords postoperative esophageal anastomotic leak and postoperative esophageal anastomotic leak stent, and retrieved relevant papers published until December 2022.

RESULTS

The endoscopic discovery of the fistula is usually followed by the insertion of a fully covered esophageal stent. It has an efficiency of more than 60% in closing the fistula, and the failure is related to the delayed application of the method, a situation more suitable for endo vac therapy. The most common complication is migration, but life-threatening complications have also been described. The combination of the advantages of endoscopic stents and vacuum therapy is probably found in the emerging VACstent procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the competing approaches give promising results, this method has a well-defined place in the treatment of esophageal fistulas, and it is probably necessary to refine the indications for each individual procedure.

Critical Appraisal of the Impact of Oesophageal Stents in the Management of Oesophageal Anastomotic Leaks and Benign Oesophageal Perforations: An Updated Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic placement of oesophageal stents may be used in benign oesophageal perforation and oesophageal anastomotic leakage to control sepsis and reduce mortality and morbidity by avoiding thoracotomy. This updated systematic review aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of oesophageal stents in these two scenarios.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of all published studies reporting use of metallic and plastic stents in the management of post-operative anastomotic leaks, spontaneous and iatrogenic oesophageal perforations were identified. Primary outcomes were technical (deploying ≥ 1 stent to occlude site of leakage with no evidence of leakage of contrast within 24-48 h) and clinical success (complete healing of perforation or leakage by placement of single or multiple stents irrespective of whether the stent was left in situ or was removed). Secondary outcomes were stent migration, perforation and erosion, and mortality rates. Subgroup analysis was performed for plastic versus metallic stents and anastomotic leaks versus perforations separately.

RESULTS

A total of 66 studies (n = 1752 patients) were included. Technical and clinical success rates were 96% and 87%, respectively. Plastic stents had significantly higher migration rates (24% vs 16%, p = 0.001) and repositioning (11% vs 3%, p < 0.001) and lower technical success (91% vs 95%, p = 0.032) than metallic stents. In patients with anastomotic leaks, plastic stents were associated with higher stent migration (26% vs 15%, p = 0.034), perforation (2% vs 0%, p = 0.013), repositioning (10% vs 0%, p < 0.001), and lower technical success (95% vs 100%, p = p = 0.002). In patients with perforations only, plastic stents were associated with significantly lower technical success (85% vs 99%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Covered metallic oesophageal stents appear to be more effective than plastic stents in the management of oesophageal perforation and anastomotic leakage. However, quality of evidence of generally poor and high-quality randomised trial is needed to further evaluate best management option for oesophageal perforation and anastomotic leakage.

The Role of Endoscopic Stent in Management of Postesophagectomy Leaks

INTRODUCTION

Anastomotic leak is a dreaded complication following esophagectomy. Conventional management for leaks includes invasive reoperation and even gastrointestinal diversion.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine our contemporary outcome of using endoscopic esophageal stenting as primary therapy for management of anastomotic leak following minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE).

METHODS

We reviewed data on 11 patients who developed an esophageal leak following 111 MIE between January 2011 and December 2019. Of the 11 anastomotic leaks, 10 patients had an anastomotic disruption and underwent endoscopic esophageal stenting as primary therapy for management of leaks, while 1 patient had an anastomotic disruption complicated by an associated tracheoesophageal fistula that required surgical reoperation and subsequent colonic interposition. Main outcome measures focused on the 10 patients who were managed with endoscopic stenting, including length of hospital stay following leak management, need for thoracotomy or gastrointestinal diversion for leak, stent complications, and leak-associated mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 10 patients who underwent endoscopic esophageal stenting as primary therapy for management of leaks, there were 8 males with a median age of 66 years. The median time to diagnosis of anastomotic leak was 10 days postoperatively. One of the ten patients also underwent percutaneous drain placement, while none of the patients required thoracotomy. Median duration of stent placement was 39 (range, 29-105) days. Median length of stay after stent placement was 10 (range, 4-43) days. The median number of stent exchange was 1 (range, 1-3) stent. Gastrointestinal continuity was maintained in all patients. The 90-day leak-associated mortality was 9.1% (1 of 11 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic stenting is an effective primary therapy in the management of postesophagectomy leak and avoids the need for an invasive, reoperative thoracotomy or gastrointestinal diversion procedure.

A comparative study of the short-term operative outcome between intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomoses during laparoscopic total gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Several studies have reported that intracorporeal anastomosis reduces the requirement for the additional incision for anastomosis, resulting in early recovery compared to extracorporeal anastomosis during laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. However, few studies have investigated postoperative outcome after laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). We compared short-term postoperative outcomes between totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) with intracorporeal anastomosis and conventional laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) with extracorporeal anastomosis for gastric cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective case-control study included 202 patients who underwent LTG from January 2012 to June 2019. LATG was performed in the period before July 2015; TLTG was performed in the period after July 2015. Postoperative short-term outcomes and white blood cell (WBC) count, and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels at 1, 3, and 5 days postoperatively were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

One hundred ten patients underwent LATG; 92 underwent TLTG. The pathologic stage was significantly higher in the TLTG group (p = 0.010). Intraoperative estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the TLTG group than in the LATG group (median [range]: 100 [50-150] mL versus [vs.] 50 [30-100], p < 0.001). Postoperative hospital stay duration was significantly longer in the TLTG group than in the LATG group (median [range]: 7 [7-9] days vs. 8 [7-11], p < 0.001). WBC count (6.3 10⁹/L ± 1.9 vs. 8.2 ± 2.5, p = 0.004) and CRP levels (8.3 mg/L ± 6.1 vs. 13.3 ± 9.4, p < 0.001) were lower in the LATG group than in the TLTG group. The overall complication rate was higher in the TLTG group than in the LATG group (16.3% vs. 32.6%, p = 0.007). A higher American Society of Anesthesiologist score was the only significant risk factor for postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Both procedures are feasible, although TLTG has more risk for postoperative complications than LATG. TLTG should be improved to reduce postoperative complications and provide better postoperative outcomes.

Risk factors and outcomes associated with anastomotic leaks following esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Anastomotic leaks (AL) are a major complication after esophagectomy. This meta-analysis aimed to determine identify risks factors for AL (preoperative, intra-operative, and post-operative factors) and assess the consequences to outcome on patients who developed an AL. This systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines, and eligible studies were identified through a search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases up to 31 December 2018. A meta-analysis was conducted with the use of random-effects modeling and prospectively registered with the PROSPERO database (Registration CRD42018130732). This review identified 174 studies reporting outcomes of 74,226 patients undergoing esophagectomy. The overall pooled AL rates were 11%, ranging from 0 to 49% in individual studies. Majority of studies were from Asia (n = 79). In pooled analyses, 23 factors were associated with AL (17 preoperative and six intraoperative). AL were associated with adverse outcomes including pulmonary (OR: 4.54, CI95%: 2.99-6.89, P < 0.001) and cardiac complications (OR: 2.44, CI95%: 1.77-3.37, P < 0.001), prolonged hospital stay (mean difference: 15 days, CI95%: 10-21 days, P < 0.001), and in-hospital mortality (OR: 5.91, CI95%: 1.41-24.79, P = 0.015). AL are a major complication following esophagectomy accounting for major morbidity and mortality. This meta-analysis identified modifiable risk factors for AL, which can be a target for interventions to reduce AL rates. Furthermore, identification of both modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors will facilitate risk stratification and prediction of AL enabling better perioperative planning, patient counseling, and informed consent.

Evolving changes of minimally invasive esophagectomy: a single-institution experience

BACKGROUND

Initial adoption of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) began in the late 1990s but its surgical technique, perioperative management, and outcome continues to evolve.

METHODS

The aim of this study was to examine the evolving changes in the technique, outcome, and new strategies in management of postoperative leaks after MIE was performed at a single institution over a two-decade period. A retrospective chart review of 75 MIE operations was performed between November 2011 and September 2018 and this was compared to the initial series of 104 MIE operations performed by the same group between 1998 and 2007. Operative technique, outcomes, and management strategies of leaks were compared.

RESULTS

There were 65 males (86.7%) with an average age of 61 years. The laparoscopic/thoracoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy became the preferred MIE approach (49% of cases in the initial vs. 95% in the current series). Compared to the initial case series, there was no significant difference in median length of stay (8 vs. 8 days), major complications (12.5% vs. 14.7%, p = 0.68), incidence of leak (9.6% vs. 10.6%, p = 0.82), anastomotic stricture (26% vs. 32.0%, p = 0.38), or in-hospital mortality (2.9% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.47). Management of esophageal leaks has changed from primarily thoracotomy ± diversion initially (50% of leak cases) to endoscopic stenting ± laparoscopy/thoracoscopy currently (87.5% of leak cases).

CONCLUSION

In a single-institutional series of MIE over two decades, there was a shift toward a preference for the laparoscopic/thoracoscopic Ivor Lewis approach with similar outcomes. The management of postoperative leaks drastically changed with predilection toward minimally invasive option with endoscopic drainage and stenting.

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.

Ischemic Conditioning of the Stomach in the Prevention of Esophagogastric Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy

Esophagectomy with esophagogastric anastomosis is a major procedure, and its most feared complication is anastomotic leakage. Ischemic conditioning of the stomach is a method used with the aim of reducing the risk of leakage. It consists of partial gastric devascularization through embolization or laparoscopy followed by esophagectomy and anastomosis at a second stage, thus providing the time for the gastric conduit to adapt to the acute ischemia at the time of its formation. This review analyzes the information from all currently available experimental and clinical studies with the purpose of assessing the current role of the technique and to provide future recommendations.

Covered stents in cervical anastomoses following esophagectomy

INTRODUCTION

Anastomotic complications after esophagectomy are relatively frequent. The off-label use of self-expanding covered metal stents has been shown to be an effective initial treatment for leaks, but there is a paucity of literature regarding their use in cervical esophagogastric anastomoses. We reviewed our outcomes with anastomotic stenting after esophagectomy with cervical esophagogastric reconstruction.

METHODS

All stents placed across cervical anastomoses following esophagectomy from 2004 to 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Indications for surgery and stent placement were collected. For patients with serial stents, each stent event was evaluated separately and as part of its series. Success was defined as resolution of indicated anastomotic problem for at least 90 days. Complications were defined as development of stent-related problems.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients had a total of 63 stents placed (16 % prophylactic, 38 % leak, 46 % stricture). Sixty percent of patients had successful resolution of their initial anastomotic problem; 67 % required more than one stent. Strictures and leaks healed in 27 and 70 % of patients, respectively, at a median of 55.5 days. Stent-related complications occurred in 78 % of patients. Complications (per stent event) included 62 % migration, 11 % clinically significant tissue overgrowth, 8 % minor erosion (ulcers), and 8 % major erosion. Stents placed for stricture were more likely to result in complications, especially migration (76.7 vs. 48.5 %, p = 0.02). Preoperative chemoradiation was a significant risk factor for erosion (22.5 vs. 4.3 %, p = 0.05), but not for overall complications. Patients with major erosions had longer stent duration compared to those without (92 vs. 36 days, p = 0.14).

DISCUSSION

Although stents are effective at controlling post-esophagectomy anastomotic leaks, they are not effective for treating strictures. Stents have high complication rates, but most are minor. Chemoradiation is a risk factor for stent erosion. Caution should be used when stent duration exceeds 2-3 months due to the risk of erosion.