The use of self-expanding silicone stents in esophageal cancer care: optimal pre-, peri-, and postoperative care

Background  Preoperative nutritional supplementation, management of esophageal leaks, and postoperative anastomotic strictures still remain common problems in the management of esophageal cancer. Jejunal feeding tubes, total parenteral nutrition (TPN) with nasogastric suction, and repeated esophageal dilations remain the most common treatments, respectively. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of removable silicone stents in (1) the preoperative nutritional optimization during neoadjuvant therapy, (2) the management of perioperative anastomotic leak, and (3) the management of postoperative anastomotic strictures. Methods  Review of our prospectively maintained esophageal database identified 15 patients who had removable self-expanding silicone stents placed in the management of one of these three management problems from July 2004 to August 2006. Results  Preoperative therapy: Five patients underwent initial stent placement in preparation for neoadjuvant therapy. Dysphagia relief was seen in 100% of patients, with optimal caloric needs taken within 24 h of placement. All patients tolerated neoadjuvant therapy without delay from dehydration or malnutrition. One stent migration was found at the time of operation, which was removed without sequelae. Perioperative therapy: Five patients developed delayed (>10 days) esophageal leaks that were managed with removable esophageal stent and percutaneous drainage (in three patients). All patients had successful exclusion of the leak on the day of the procedure with resumption of oral intake on the evening of procedure. All five healed leaks without sequelae. Postoperative therapy: Five patients developed postoperative anastomotic strictures that required dilation and placement of removable esophageal stent. The median number of dilations was 1 (range 1–2), with all stents placed for approximate 3 months duration. All patients had immediate dysphagia relief after stent placement. Conclusion  Removable esophageal stents are novel treatment option to optimize relief of symptoms and return the patients back to a more normal oral intake. Continued evaluation is needed to consider stent use as first-line therapy.     

A management algorithm for esophageal perforation

Despite the prolonged morbidity caused by a major surgery and the high occurrence of continued leakage, primary repair has been the standard treatment for esophageal perforations. We believe that management using removable esophageal stents is both simpler and more effective. Over the past 3 years, we have treated 14 patients using esophageal stents, and the procedure was successful in all patients. Because of the shorter bed rest that follows endoscopic Polyflex stent (Rush, Inc; Teleflex Medical, Duluth, GA) placement, it is very likely that the care of patients with esophageal perforation will be changed over time.     

Endoscopic therapy for esophageal perforation or anastomotic leak with a self-expandable metallic stent

Background

Leaks of the esophagus are associated with a high mortality rate and need to be treated as soon as possible. Therapeutic options are surgical repair or resection or conservative management with cessation of oral intake and antibiotic therapy. We evaluated an alternative approach that uses self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS).

Methods

Between 2002 and 2007, 31 consecutive patients with iatrogenic esophageal perforation (n = 9), intrathoracic anastomotic leak after esophagectomy (n = 16), spontaneous tumor perforation (n = 5), and esophageal ischemia (n = 1) were treated at our institution. All were treated with endoscopic placement of a covered SEMS. Stent removal was performed 4 to 6 weeks after implantation. To exclude continuous esophageal leak after SEMS placement, radiologic examination was performed after stent implantation and removal.

Results

SEMS placement was successful in all patients and a postinterventional esophagogram demonstrated full coverage of the leak in 29 patients (92%). In two patients, complete sealing could not be achieved and they were referred to surgical repair. Stent migration was seen in only one patient (3%). After removal, a second stent with larger diameter was placed and no further complication occurred. Two patients died: one due to myocardial infarction and one due to progressive ischemia of the esophagus and small bowl as a consequence of vascular occlusion. Stent removal was performed within 6 weeks, and all patients had radiologic and endoscopic evidence of esophageal healing.

Conclusions

Implantation of covered SEMS in patients with esophageal leak or perforation is a safe and feasible alternative to operative treatment and can lower the interventional morbidity rate.     

Endoscopic management of inveterate esophageal perforations and leaks

The endoscopic management of four selected patients with inveterate esophageal perforations or leaks is presented. One patient had a perforation of the cervical esophagus following endoscopic removal of a foreign body already treated with surgical drainage; two patients had a leak following diverticulectomy and esophagogastrostomy, respectively, persistent after multiple surgical repairs; the last patient had a spontaneous perforation of the thoracic esophagus persistent after two transthoracic repairs. The mean time elapsed between the diagnosis of perforation and the endoscopic treatment was 19 days. In one patient, transesophageal drainage of a mediastinal abscess was performed. In the other three patients, a stent was placed to seal the leak in combination with gastric and esophageal aspiration. Two of these patients underwent endoscopy in critical condition and could have not been candidates for major surgical procedures. All patients received enteral nutrition. No morbidity or mortality related to the endoscopic procedure was recorded; the treatment was effective in all patients who recovered and resumed oral feeding within 3 weeks. We conclude that endoscopic transesophageal drainage and stenting are effective procedures in the management of patients with inveterate esophageal perforations or leaks.     

Stent placement in the management of oesophageal leaks

Objective: To examine retrospectively the patients of our department who had a self-expandable totally covered metal stent placed for oesophageal leak. METHODS: Patients hospitalised in our department for oesophageal cancer and/or oesophageal perforation between 2004 and 2006. All medical records were retrospectively reviewed. Seventy-two patients underwent oesophageal resection for oesophageal cancer and 16 were managed for oesophageal perforations. RESULTS: Eight out of 72 patients submitted to resection for oesophageal cancer had postoperative leaks, while one patient developed tracheo-oesophageal fistula (TEF) due to prolonged mechanical ventilation. Six of them had stent placement in first intention, whereas two received the procedure after an unsuccessful repeat operation. The mean stent placement time was 18.4 days (SD=15.2 days), whereas the median was 14 days. The leak was managed efficiently by the stent in seven patients, whereas two patients needed repeat operations (one with TEF). The mean stent removal time was 56.8 days (SD=30.5 days) and the median was 40 days. None developed anastomotic stricture. On the other hand, three out of 16 patients with perforation had a stent, two of them for Boerhaave syndrome and one for iatrogenic rupture after bariatric surgery. One of them required the stent 17 days after surgical repair with excellent results, while the other two patients had the stent placed immediately, but still needed thoracotomy to control the leak. CONCLUSIONS: Stent placement can prove very useful in the management of post-oesophagectomy anastomotic leaks, but its contribution needs to be evaluated with caution in cases of oesophageal perforations or TEF. Larger series and prospective comparative clinical trials could eventually clarify the role of stents in clinical practice of surgical patients.     

Repair of an aberrant subclavian arterioesophageal fistula following esophageal stent placement

A fistula formation between the esophagus and an aberrant right subclavian artery is a rare but fatal com-plication that has been mostly described in the setting of prolonged nasogastric intubation and foreign body erosion. We report a case of a young morbidly obese patient who underwent sleeve gastrectomy that was complicated by a postoperative leak at the level of the gastroesophageal junction. A covered esophageal stent was placed endoscopically to treat the leak. The pa-tient developed massive upper gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to the erosion of the stent into an aberrant retroesophageal right subclavian artery twelve days after stent placement. She was ultimately treated by endovascular stenting of the aberrant right subclavian artery followed by thoracotomy and esophageal repair over a T-tube. This case report highlights the multidis-ciplinary approach needed to diagnose and managesuch a devastating complication. It also emphasizes the need for imaging studies prior to stent deployment to delineate the vascular anatomy and rule out the possi-bility of such an anomaly in view of the growing popu-larity of esophageal stents, especially in the setting of a leak.     

Successful management of a nonmalignant esophageal perforation with a coated stent

This case report details our experience in the management of an iatrogenic perforation that recurred after two surgical repairs. A self-expanding coated stent was eventually placed to seal the esophageal perforation with significant improvement in the clinical condition of the patient. At 1-year follow-up, the patient is tolerating an oral diet with no evidence of esophageal leak or gastroesophageal reflux. This case report and a literature review suggest that self-expanding coated stents may be a useful salvage option in the management of inveterate nonmalignant esophageal perforations.     

Expandable stents for iatrogenic perforation of esophageal malignancies

The management of patients with iatrogenic perforation of esophageal cancers is controversial. We reviewed the management of perforated esophageal malignancies at a single institution with a large volume of patients with esophageal cancer. Cases of iatrogenic perforation of the esophagus occurring during a 3-year period were identified from the hospital endoscopy database. Inpatient and outpatient records were reviewed, and subjects were visited to obtain follow-up information. Perforation was suspected after 10 of 492 endoscopic dilatation procedures done in patients with obstructing esophageal malignancies. All patients were diagnosed immediately. One patient with pneumomediastinum and pneumoperitoneum died 7 days after laparotomy. Nine patients with pneumomediastinum were managed endoscopically with delayed (n=1) or immediate (n=8) placement of a self-expanding metal stent. Patients were treated in the hospital for an average of 5.4 days. No patients developed clinical signs of sepsis, and all were discharged tolerating a soft diet. Follow-up data were obtained for seven of nine discharged patients (range 152 to 263 days). None developed signs or symptoms of infection or recurrent dysphagia. Immediate placement of a coated self-expanding metal stent is an effective treatment for iatrogenic perforation of an obstructing esophageal malignancy. Presented at the Forty-Third Annual Meeting of The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, San Francisco, California, May 19–22, 2002.     

Life-threatening acute posterior mediastinitis due to esophageal perforation

We analyzed the treatment of a recent group of patients with life-threatening acute posterior mediastinitis due to esophageal perforation to elucidate common factors in successful treatment. Life-threatening acute posterior mediastinitis due to esophageal perforation was diagnosed in 16 patients over the past 12 years. Esophageal perforation resulted from endoscopy in 11 patients, retching in 4, and blunt trauma in 1 patient. Preoperative serum albumin levels were higher in patients who survived. Fourteen of 16 patients (88%) underwent exploration: mediastinal drainage in 14 (10 survived), esophageal repair in 9 (7 survived) with diversion in 3 (3 survived), and stent placement in 2 (1 survived). Six of 16 patients (38%) died, always of polymicrobial sepsis. Female patients and those with cancer, endoscopic perforations, delayed diagnosis, persistent mediastinal contamination, mediastinal suppuration or necrotizing cellulitis, and postoperative complications did poorly. Antibiotics must be effective against both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, and against both anaerobic and aerobic bacteria. Early surgical intervention is key, particularly elimination of ongoing mediastinal soilage. Thorough mediastinal debridement and wide mediastinal drainage appear to be important in improving survival of patients with life-threatening acute posterior mediastinitis due to esophageal perforation.     

Thoracic esophageal perforations: a decade of experience

BACKGROUND: Perforation of the thoracic esophagus is a formidable challenge. Treatment and outcome are largely determined by the time to presentation. We reviewed our experience with esophageal perforations to determine the overall mortality and whether the time to presentation should influence management strategy. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients treated for perforation of the thoracic esophagus from 1990 to 2001. There were 26 patients (14 men and 12 women; median age, 62 years; range, 36 to 89 years). Fourteen patients presented within 24 hours (early), and 12 patients presented after 24 hours (delayed). Nine of the 12 patients in the delayed group presented after 72 hours. The causes of the perforations were as follows: instrumentation (19 patients), Boerhaave's syndrome (2 patients), intraoperative injury (1 patient), and other (4 patients). In the early group, 3 patients were treated conservatively, 10 patients underwent primary repair, and 1 patient required esophagectomy for carcinoma. In the delayed group, 3 patients were treated conservatively, 6 underwent successful repair of the perforation, 1 had a T-tube placement through the perforation and eventually required an esophagectomy, and 2 had an esophagectomy as primary surgical treatment. RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 3.8% (1 of 26) and morbidity was 38% (10 of 26). Persistent leaks occurred in 3 patients, 2 after primary repair and 1 after T-tube drainage. All patients selected for conservative management successfully healed their perforation. CONCLUSIONS: Primary repair can be carried out in most cases of thoracic esophageal perforation regardless of time to presentation, with a low mortality rate. A small but carefully selected group of patients may be treated successfully without operation. Esophagectomy should be reserved for patients with carcinoma or extensive necrosis of the esophagus.     

Use of self-expandable metal stents for the treatment of esophageal perforations and anastomotic leaks

Background  Esophageal perforations and extensive anastomotic leaks after esophageal resection or gastrectomy are surgical emergencies with high mortality rates. In recent years, the use of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) has emerged as a promising treatment alternative for bridging and sealing the damage. This study aimed to evaluate the role of covered SEMS for the management of esophageal perforations and anastomotic leaks. Methods  All esophageal stent placement procedures (174 procedures for 157 patients) at the authors’ unit between January 1999 and April 2008 were assessed by a retrospective chart review. Of the 157 patients, 10 (6.4%) were treated with SEMS for sealing of an iatrogenic esophageal perforation (n = 4), a spontaneous esophageal rupture in Boerhaave’s syndrome (n = 4), or an anastomotic leakage (n = 2). Results  The median time from perforation or anastomotic leak to stent insertion was 13 days (range, 2 h to 48 days). The esophageal leak was totally sealed for 8 (80%) of 10 patients. The overall mortality rate was 50% (n = 5), and three (30%) of the five deaths were related to the perforation (n = 2) or leakage (n = 1). In both of the perforation cases, the diagnosis and treatment were substantially delayed. One patient with an anastomotic leak after gastrectomy died of the complication despite successful operative and SEMS treatment. Two of the deaths were unrelated to the perforation. In both cases, the cause of death was a disseminated malignant disease. Conclusions  Traumatic perforations and anastomotic leaks can be treated effectively with covered SEMS together with adequate drainage of the thoracic cavity even in cases of severely ill patients with inveterate esophageal perforations and leaks.     

Treatment of intrathoracic esophageal anastomotic leaks by means of endoscopic stent implantation

Intrathoracic anastomotic leakage in patients with esophagectomy is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Until recently surgical reexploration was the preferred way of dealing with this life-threatening complication. But mortality remained significant. After the first successful reports we adopted endoscopic stent implantation as a primary treatment option. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and the results of endoscopic stent implantation. Between January 2004 and December 2009, 167 patients underwent an esophageal resection. Surgery was mainly the result of esophageal cancer. An intrathoracic esophageal anastomotic leak was endoscopically verified in 17 patients. Twelve patients received an implantation of a self-expanding stent as a primary treatment. An endoscopic stent placement was accomplished in all 12 patients. In nine patients a definitive closure of the leak was achieved and the stent could subsequently be removed. Two patients died due to severe sepsis in spite of sufficient stent placement. Because of early recurrence of very malign small cell cancer the stent remained in situ in one patient. In conclusion, stent implantation for intrathoracic esophageal anastomotic leaks is feasible and compares favorable with the results of surgical reexploration. It is an easily available minimally-invasive procedure which may reduce leak-related mortality and morbidity.     

The Use of Endoscopic Stent in Management of Leaks After Sleeve Gastrectomy

Gastric leak after sleeve gastrectomy can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to examine the safety and efficacy of endoscopic deployment of a covered esophageal stent in the management of leaks after sleeve gastrectomy. Three consecutive patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy at outside institutions presented with leaks. All three patients underwent endoscopic placement of a covered stent. Additional procedures included laparoscopic or percutaneous drainage of abdominal collection(s). The patients were two women and one man, with a mean age of 34 years. One patient presented acutely at day 7 after the index operation and two patients presented late at 6 and 9 months, respectively. Two patients had proximal gastric leaks and one patient had a proximal gastric leak with a concomitant obstruction at the mid-aspect of the gastric sleeve. Endoscopic deployment of a covered stent was successful in all cases. There were no complications relating to the stent placement. The stent was removed at 6 weeks in two patients and at 4 months in one patient. The use of endoscopic stent was a safe and effective option in the management of leaks after sleeve gastrectomy.     

Surgical management of esophageal perforation: role of esophageal conservation in delayed perforation

Definitive repair of esophageal perforation is considered the preferred treatment for patients presenting early (<24 hours). However, the optimal management of delayed presentation (>24 hours) has not been well defined. This study examined the management of esophageal perforation and compared the outcomes of early versus delayed presentation. Records of patients admitted with the diagnosis of esophageal perforation were reviewed. Contrast studies were used to confirm the diagnosis in all cases. Patient demographics and outcome were analyzed to determine differences between early and delayed presentation. A total of 22 cases of esophageal perforation were identified (eight early vs 14 delayed presentations). Operative interventions included primary repair (four), reinforced repair (14) either with intercostal muscle or pleural flap, and a complete esophageal resection (one). Debridement and drainage without repair were done in two patients and a proximal intramural tear was treated with antibiotics and observation. Two patients died during hospitalization. All surviving patients had near-normal restoration of esophageal function. Follow-up at 3 years has shown minimal gastrointestinal problems. One patient required repeat esophageal dilatations and two patients underwent antireflux therapy. Esophageal repair should be considered in all cases of nonmalignant esophageal perforation and should not be influenced by the time of presentation.     

The management of nonmalignant intrathoracic esophageal perforations

Eight patients with nonmalignant intrathoracic esophageal perforations recognized more than 48 hours (48 hours to 14 days) after rupture were treated at Toronto General Hospital between 1973 and 1978. Perforation was due to postemetic rupture in 7 patients and to instrumentation in 1. The patients were seen with pain (8), vomiting (7), fever (7), shock (4), respiratory insufficiency (5), pleural effusion (7), pulmonary infiltrates (7), and leukocytosis (6). All patients were managed with thoracotomy. Direct suture closure of the perforation was carried out in 4 patients with midesophageal perforations. Postoperative localized leaks developed in 2 of these patients but healed with conservative management. Cervical esophagostomy and esophageal diversion were used in 1 patient in whom a severe empyema developed in the postoperative period. Direct suture closure, reinforced with a gastric patch, was used to close three lower esophageal perforations. None of these patients had a postoperative leak but all developed subsequent reflux esophagitis. All 8 patients survived. In patients with delayed recognition of a nonmalignant intrathoracic esophageal perforation, elimination of continued chemical and bacterial contamination can be achieved by a clear definition and closure of the esophageal mucosal margins. The obliteration of potential pleural spaces by good tube drainage, lung decortication, and the elective use of mechanical ventilation with positive end-expiratory pressure decreases the incidence of uncontrolled intrapleural sepsis.     

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.     

New Approach to Surgical Management of Early Esophageal Thoracic Perforation: Primary Suture Repair Reinforced with Absorbable Mesh and Fibrin Glue

Esophageal perforation is a life-threatening situation and represents a major therapeutic challenge. Results have improved in recent years particularly as a result of progress in antibiotic therapy and the use of total parenteral nutrition. Surgical management retains a predominant role, involving early primary closure and thoracic drainage. We have made an addition to the surgical management by applying an absorbable mesh and fibrin glue to the repaired site. Seven patients (ages 38–79 years) were treated as described. The mean interval from leak to surgery was 28 hours. Six patients had an uneventful postoperative course with a mean hospital stay of 34 days (range 26–45 days). In one case the technique failed and the patient required an exclusion-diversion procedure. All 7 patients recovered without mortality. We believe that this technique provides a real improvement for this precarious esophageal repair.     

食管穿孔和破裂的诊断与治疗

目的 提高对食管穿孔和破裂的诊断及处理水平。方法 回顾性分析经外科处理的45例食管穿孔或破裂患的临床资料。结果 本组患经胸部平片、胸腔穿刺、上消化道造影及胃镜确诊。15例为自发性食管破裂，6例为医源性穿孔，5例为创伤性穿孔，10例为食管癌并食管支气管瘘，9例为食管憩室并食管支气管瘘。治疗予以食管修补9例；胸腔引流、空肠造瘘9例(其中1例为食管修补失败后改行此手术)；食管切除胃食管吻合术12例(其中3例为食管修补失败)；胃造瘘术4例；置入食管支架4例；食管支气管瘘切除修补3例；食管瘘口修补并肺叶切除2例；食管胃弓上短路1例，颈部引流2例；放弃治疗3例。治愈25例，好转11例，死亡6例。结论 详细了解病史和进行胸腔穿刺、上消化道造影等检查可帮助诊断。尽早手术闭合瘘口和治疗食管原发病变是治疗的关键。     

Natural orifice management of anastomotic leaks after minimally invasive esophagogastrectomy

A leak after an esophagectomy can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. The treatment options for postoperative leaks include reoperation with pleural drainage and placement of T-tube drainage catheter to control the gastrointestinal leak or complete gastrointestinal diversion, depending on the extent of the leak and tissue viability of the gastric conduit. Both these options require an invasive reoperation. In selected cases, endoscopic deployment of a covered esophageal stent may be an effective minimally invasive option in the management of an esophageal leak. This report describes the indications and techniques for management of an esophageal leak using the natural orifice for drainage of a mediastinal abscess and deployment of an esophageal stent.     

Iatrogenic Injury of the Intrathoracic Esophagus Sustained During a Gastric Banding Procedure

The wide diffusion of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding as a common surgical procedure for the treatment of morbidly obese patients can be attributed not only to the easy surgical technique, the ability to caliber the stoma, and the potential for reversibility, but also to the fact that this procedure is associated with a low rate of immediate postoperative complications compared to other more complex bariatric procedures. Herein reported is the case of a 63-year-old morbidly obese woman who sustained an iatrogenic injury of the intrathoracic esophagus during a laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding procedure. The putative mechanism of this previously unreported complication of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding and the therapeutic options are discussed. The patient was initially treated with left pleural cavity drainage, antibiotics and the placement of an endoscopic silicone covered stent to cover the esophageal tear. Nine days later she underwent surgery through left thoracotomy due to the persistence of the esophageal leak. Esophageal perforation is a potentially life- threatening complication that may occur during a laparoscopic gastric banding procedure. The conservative treatment with an endoscopic stent should be reserved to patients with no signs of progressive systemic inflammation and include the drainage of the pleural cavity and the mediastinum, the endoscopic lavage and debridement. Standard surgical treatment with direct repair should not be retarded in case of persistence of the leak.