Endoluminal management of anastomotic dehiscence after esophagectomy: an increasing quiver of options reflects the difficulty in realizing a definitive therapy

Applications of endoscopic vacuum therapy in the upper gastrointestinal tract

Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) is an increasingly popular treatment option for wall defects in the upper gastrointestinal tract. After its initial description for the treatment of anastomotic leaks after esophageal and gastric surgery, it was also implemented for a wide range of defects, including acute perforations, duodenal lesions, and postbariatric complications. Apart from the initially proposed handmade sponge inserted using the “piggyback” technique, further devices were used, such as the commercially available EsoSponge and VAC-Stent as well as open-pore film drainage. The reported pressure settings and intervals between the subsequent endoscopic procedures vary greatly, but all available evidence highlights the efficacy of EVT, with high success rates and low morbidity and mortality, so that in many centers it is considered to be a first-line treatment, especially for anastomotic leaks.

One Decade of Experience with Endoscopic Stenting for Intrathoracic Anastomotic Leakage after Esophagectomy: Brilliant Breakthrough or Flash in the Pan?

Management of intrathoracic anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy by means of endoscopic stent insertion has gained wide acceptance as an alternative to surgical reintervention. Between January 2004 and March 2013 all patients who underwent esophagectomy at a German high-volume center for esophageal surgery were included in this retrospective study. The study comprises 356 patients. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 49 cases. There were no significant differences in age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, or frequency of neoadjuvant therapy between cases with and without leak. However, leak patients sustained significantly more often postoperative pneumonia, pleural empyema, sepsis, and acute renal failure. Moreover, leak victims had higher odds for fatal outcome (16 of 49 vs 33 of 307; odds ratio, 5.94; 95% confidence interval, 2.65 to 13.15; P < 0.0001). The leakage was amendable by endoscopic stenting in 29 cases, whereas rethoracotomy was mandatory in 20 patients. Between stent and rethoracotomy cases, we observed no significant differences in age, ASA score, neoadjuvant therapy, occurrence of pneumonia, pleural empyema, or tracheostomy rate. Rethoracotomy patients sustained more often sepsis (16 of 20 vs 14 of 29; P = 0.04) and acute renal failure (nine of 20 vs four of 29; P = 0.02) as expression of more severe septic disease. Nevertheless, there was no significant difference in mortality (seven of 29 vs nine of 20; P = 0.21). Furthermore, we observed three cases of stent-related aortic erosion with peracute death from exsanguination. Despite being the preferred treatment option, endoscopic stenting was only feasible in approximately 60 per cent of all intrathoracic leaks. The results are marred by the occurrence of deadly vascular erosion. Therefore, individualized strategies should be preferred to a general recommendation for endoscopic stenting.