Esophagectomy in esophageal perforations: an analysis

This study aimed to study the factors that are associated with urgent esophagectomy for the treatment of esophageal perforations and the impact of this therapy. A retrospective review of all esophageal perforations treated at a tertiary care hospital from January 1984 to January 2012 was performed. Compiling demographics, cause and site of perforations, time to presentation, comorbidities, radiological tests, the length of perforation, the hemodynamic status of the patient, type of treatment required, and outcomes were performed. Univariate, multivariate, and Cox regression analyses were conducted. Of 127 cases of esophageal perforation, it was spontaneous in 44 (35%), iatrogenic in 53 (44%), foreign body ingestion in 22 (17%), and traumatic perforation in 7 (6%) cases. Overall, 85 of the 127 (67%) patients were managed operatively, 35 (27.6%) patients were treated conservatively, and 7 (6.3%) patients were treated by endoscopic stent placement. Of the 85 patients who were managed operatively, 21 (16.5%) required esophagectomies, 13 (15.3%) had esophagectomy with immediate reconstruction, 5 (5.9%) patients had esophagectomy followed by delayed reconstruction, and 3 (3.5%) patients failed primary repair and required an esophagectomy as a secondary definitive procedure. Multivariate analysis revealed that esophagectomy in esophageal perforations was associated with the presence of benign or malignant esophageal stricture (P = 0.001) and a perforation >5 cm (P = 0.001). Mortality was mainly associated with the presence of a benign or malignant esophageal stricture (P = 0.04). The presence of pre‐existing benign or malignant stricture or large perforation (>5 cm) is associated with the need for an urgent esophagectomy with or without immediate reconstruction. Performing esophagectomy was not found to be a significant prognosticator for mortality.     

Extrinsic Esophageal Compression by Cervical Osteophytes in Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis: A Contraindication to Transesophageal Echocardiography?

Contraindications to transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) include various esophageal pathologies, but compression of the esophagus by vertebral osteophytes is not listed in the current American Society of Echocardiography guidelines. We report a case of diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) in an 81‐year‐old man who had incidentally been found to have extrinsic esophageal compression by cervical osteophytes prior to a proposed TEE. The incidence of esophageal perforation in patients with DISH and vertebral osteophytes is not well documented. We believe these patients are at increased risk of esophageal perforation during TEE, and thus, TEE may be relatively contraindicated in patients with DISH.     

Selective approach in the treatment of esophageal perforations

Background: Treatment of esophageal perforation remains controversial and recommendations vary from initially non‐operative to aggressive surgical management. Several factors are responsible for this life‐threatening event, which has led to more individualized treatment ensuring adequate pleuromediastinal drainage with sufficient irrigation. We analyzed our data, evaluating morbidity and mortality in this selective approach. Methods: During 1985 to 2001, 17 of the 38 patients with esophageal perforation treated in our hospital underwent primarily a thoracotomy, wide drainage and debridement of chest/mediastinum and enteral hyperalimentation. Twenty‐one patients (55%) initially were treated non‐operatively (NPO, nasogastric tube, hyperalimentation, antibiotics and chest tube), but surgery was required in 9 patients (43%). Results: Most perforations were iatrogenic (45%; 17/38) followed by spontaneous perforations (32%; 12/38). Cervical perforations were managed earlier (<24?h) than thoracic tears, 8/10 (80%) and 17/28 (61%) respectively. Initial conservative treatment failed in all spontaneous ruptures and more in thoracic lesions (62%) than in cervical lesions (13%). Most patients with thoracic perforations and ‘free’ intrathoracic contamination underwent primary surgery. Surgery with adequate drainage (n?=?23) was based on signs of sepsis, empyema and progression of pneumomediastinum/thorax. Mortality occurred in one patient (3%), initially treated conservatively. Median intensive care and duration of hospitalization were not different between the conservative (5 and 7 days, respectively) and the primary surgical approach (21 and 27 days, respectively), but were higher after secondary surgery (13 and 50 days, respectively). Conclusions: Spontaneous esophageal perforations require early surgical exploration with drainage and irrigation of mediastinum and pleural cavity, while most iatrogenic lesions can be managed conservatively. Cervical perforations can be treated adequately non‐operatively, but thoracic perforations often require surgical intervention.     

Esophageal perforation, the most feared complication of TEE: early recognition by multimodality imaging

Esophageal perforation is the most feared complication of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), although the overall risk is extremely low. We report a case of esophageal perforation in a 77-year-old woman who had no apparent contraindications to TEE. Chronic steroid therapy for symptoms of asthma as well as osteophytic changes of the cervical vertebrae contributed to her increased risk of perforation. Unlike in prior reports, the perforation in this case was fortuitously recognized rapidly due to ingestion of a carbonated beverage for evaluation of a hiatal hernia suspected during a subsequent transthoracic echocardiogram performed because of inadequate TEE images after a difficult intubation. The incidence of esophageal perforation in our series (1 in 5,000 TEEs, 0.02%) is similar to that reported in the literature. Early recognition and prompt surgical repair of the esophageal perforation led to favorable outcome in our patient.     

Clinical experience of esophageal perforation occurring with endoscopic submucosal dissection

Esophageal perforation occurring during or after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a rare, but serious complication. However, reports of its characteristics, including endoscopic imaging and management, have not been fully detailed. To analyze and report the clinical presentation and management of esophageal perforations occurred during or after EMR/ESD. Four hundred seventy‐two esophageal neoplasms in 368 patients were treated (171 EMR; ESD 306) at Northern Yokohama Hospital from 2003 to 2012. Esophageal perforation occurred in a total of seven (1.9%) patients, all of whom were male and had undergone ESD. The etiology of perforation was: three (42.9%) intraoperative; three (42.9%) balloon dilatation for stricture prevention; one (14.2%) due to food bolus impaction. All cases were managed non‐operatively based on the comprehensive assessment of clinical severity, extent of the injury, and the time interval from perforation to treatment onset. Conservative management included (i) bed rest and continuous monitoring to determine the need for operative intervention; (ii) fasting and intravenous fluid infusion/ tube feeding; and (iii) intravenous antibiotics. All defects closed spontaneously, save one case where closure was achieved by endoscopic clipping. Surgery was not required. Conservative management for esophageal perforation during advanced endoscopic resection is may be possible when there is no delay in diagnosis or treatment. Decision‐making should be governed purely by multidisciplinary discussion.     

Risk factors of oesophageal perforation during pneumatic dilatation for achalasia.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Pneumatic dilatation of the oesophagus is a well established treatment for achalasia. Oesophageal perforation is the most serious complication that occurs in 2% to 6% of cases. The aim of this retrospective survey was to identify predictive risk factors for perforation in a consecutive series of 218 patients with achalasia. METHODS: Between 1983 and 1993, 270 pneumatic dilatations were performed in 218 patients. A Witzel dilator was used in 58 cases and a Rigiflex dilator in 212. Eight oesophageal perforations occurred (3%). The clinical, radiological, endoscopic, manometric, and technical data for the eight perforated patients were compared with those of 30 patients randomly sampled among those without perforation. RESULTS: All perforations occurred during the first dilatation. Perforations were fewer during dilatations with the Rigiflex dilator than with the Witzel dilator (2.4% v 5.2%). Perforations were all located above the cardia, on the left side of the oesophagus. In a multivariate analysis, a small weight loss and a high amplitude of oesophageal contractions in the group of patients with perforations were predictive of complications (respectively, p = 0.001 and p = 0.026). A contraction amplitude higher than 70 cm H2O in the lower part of the oesophagus was observed in three of eight patients with perforations but was not seen in any of the 30 patients without perforation (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This identification of risk factors should facilitate the choice between pneumatic dilatation or a surgical approach.     

Esophageal Perforation After Transesophageal Echocardiogram

Esophageal rupture after transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) is a rare but life-threatening complication. Risk factors for perforation include spasm or hypertrophy of the cricopharyngeal sphincter, cervical arthritis, forward and left lateral bending of the distal esophagus, and esophageal disease such as inflammation or neoplasm. We present the case of a 80-year-old woman who developed perforation of her esophagus after TEE. Prior irradiation to the chest due to treatment for breast cancer and subsequent fibrosis probably contributed to this complication. Physicians referring patients for a TEE and physicians performing this procedure should be aware for the risk of perforation. The identification of risk factors and gentle maneuvering of the probe may prevent this severe, life-threatening complication.     

Thoracic osteophyte: rare cause of esophageal perforation

Esophageal perforation is a difficult problem in thoracic surgery. Esophageal perforations can be spontaneous, iatrogenic, or malignant. We report two cases of esophageal perforations caused by thoracic osteophytes and different management strategies leading to successful outcomes. An 80-year-old male presented with chest pain and dysphagia following a fall. On endoscopy, an esophageal perforation and foreign body was noted which was confirmed as a thoracic osteophyte on computed tomography scan. He was managed conservatively as he declined surgery. A 63-year-old male was admitted with dysphagia following a food bolus obstruction. Following esophagoscopy and dilatation, there was clinical and radiological evidence of perforation. During surgery, a thoracic osteophyte was identified as the cause of perforation. The perforation was closed in layers and the osteophyte was trimmed. Both patients recovered well. Thoracic osteophytes are a rare cause of esophageal perforations and a high index of suspicion is required in patients with osteoarthritis who present with esophageal perforations.     

Utility of three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography in the diagnosis of valvular perforations

Three-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiographic (TEE) imaging is a relatively new imaging modality that is increasingly being used to characterize a variety of cardiac pathologic features. In the present study, we reviewed the 2-dimensional (2D) and 3D TEE images from our echocardiographic database to identify patients with valve perforations. A review of the 2D TEE images resulted in the identification of 11 valvular perforations (6 aortic valves, 4 mitral valves, and 1 tricuspid valve). A review of the 3D TEE images allowed for the identification of 15 valve perforations (7 aortic valves, 7 mitral valves, and 1 tricuspid valve), including 4 perforations that could not be diagnosed using 2D imaging alone. In conclusion, 3D TEE imaging provided added benefit to traditional 2D TEE imaging because of its ability to provide en face visualization of the cardiac valves, allowing improved identification and precise anatomic localization of the perforation.     

Treatment of chronic contained spontaneous esophageal perforations

Spontaneous esophageal perforations are associated with a high mortality and morbidity without surgery. The treatment mortality for early (<24) and late (>24 h) spontaneous esophageal perforations is reviewed as well as all recent cases of chronic spontaneous esophageal perforations. Chronic esophageal perforations with mediastinal cavities may be best treated by internal drainage of the cavity into the esophagus in order to convert the transmural perforation into an intramural esophageal dissection.     

Risk factors for surgical site infection after surgery for esophageal perforation

SUMMARY.  Esophageal perforations carry a high potential for morbidity and mortality. The prognosis depends on rapid and precise diagnosis and management. Surgical site infections (SSIs) are very common following the surgical treatment of esophageal lesions. We aimed identify significant risk factors for SSI after surgery for esophageal perforation via an historical cohort study including patients who underwent surgical management of esophageal perforation. The predictive variables were analyzed by bivariate analysis and multiple logistic regression. Eighty-one patients were studied during a 10-year period ending in 2004. The mean age was 42.6 years. In 44% of the patients the time interval between the perforation and surgery was up to 6 h and in 30% it was > 24 h. Associated lesions occurred in other cavities; 17% in the chest, 5% in the abdomen, 5% in the extremities, 4% in the spinal column and bone marrow and 2% in the face. There were grade I lesions in eight cases (10%), grade II in 64 cases (79%) and grade III in nine cases (11%). The mean time of surgery procedure was 117.2 min. The mean SSI was 7.99. SSIs occurred in 33 patients (41%). The risk factors for SSI following surgical management of esophageal perforation were: age ≥ 50 years, time delay to treatment > 24 h, associated lesion in another cavity and Injury Severity Score ≥ 15.     

Nonoperative treatment of four esophageal perforations with hemostatic clips

Spontaneous or iatrogenic esophageal perforations are despite advances of modern surgery and intensive care medicine still potentially life-threatening events with a considerable mortality rate. Recently, encouraging results on the sealing of esophageal perforations by placement of endoluminal prostheses were reported. However, if the perforation is very proximal (close to the larynx) or very distal (involving the cardia), the situation is to our experience unsuitable for stent therapy. In these special cases non-operative treatment is still possible by application of hemostatic metal clips. We present four cases unsuitable for stent therapy where the perforation was sealed by endoscopic clip application. All patients had an uneventful recovery. Non-operative treatment of esophageal perforations with hemostatic metal clips is feasible and safe in cases not treatable with self-expanding metal stents.     

Gastrointestinal perforation during neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in patients with esophageal cancer: a report of two cases

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by surgery is the standard treatment for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma diagnosed as clinical stage II/III in Japan, and the indications for chemotherapy for esophageal cancer are increasing. Here, we report two patients who suffered from upper gastrointestinal perforation during NAC for esophageal cancer. NAC with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (CF regimen) was performed for both patients. Emergency operations were performed in all the patients prior to curative surgery for esophageal cancer. Endoscopic examination should be performed to confirm peptic ulcers or scars before NAC with CF regimen, and premedication with a proton pump inhibitor and the avoidance of steroid use are recommended for patients with a history of peptic ulcer to prevent perforation during NAC. Whether the occurrence of perforations during NAC is a risk factor for recurrence or a poor prognosis should be investigated in patients with esophageal cancer.     

Endoscopic clip application for closure of esophageal perforations caused by EMR

BACKGROUND: With increasing use of EMR for early stage esophageal carcinoma, the number of cases of iatrogenic esophageal perforation is likely to increase. This study evaluated the results of endoscopic clip application for treatment of perforations caused by EMR in patients with esophageal carcinoma. METHODS: Among 185 patients who underwent EMR for esophageal carcinoma, esophageal perforation occurred in 3 patients (1.6%). Metallic clips were immediately applied endoscopically to close the perforations. OBSERVATIONS: All 3 patients were observed closely and were managed conservatively (intravenous hyperalimentation, antibiotics) after closure of the perforation. They were discharged without any further serious complication. CONCLUSIONS: When esophageal perforation caused by EMR is immediately recognized, endoscopic application of metallic clips is appropriate therapy. However, patients must be carefully monitored for the development of generalized mediastinitis.     

Factors associated with gastrointestinal perforation in a cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Objective

To estimate the incidence and risk factors for gastrointestinal (GI) perforation among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

Claims from employer health insurance plans were used to identify RA patients and those hospitalized for upper or lower GI perforation. GI perforation cases were identified using both a sensitive and a specific definition. A Cox model using fixed and time‐varying covariates was used to evaluate the risk of GI perforation.

Results

Among 143,433 RA patients, and using a maximally sensitive GI perforation definition, 696 hospitalizations with perforation were identified. The rate of perforation was 1.70 per 1,000 person years (PYs; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.58–1.83), and most perforations (83%) occurred in the lower GI tract. The rate of perforation was lower when a more specific GI perforation definition was used (0.87; 95% CI 0.78–0.96 per 1,000 PYs). Age and diverticulitis were among the strongest risk factors for perforation (diverticulitis hazard ratio [HR] 14.5 [95% CI 11.8–17.7] for the more sensitive definition, HR 3.9 [95% CI 2.5–5.9] for the more specific definition). Among various RA medication groups and compared to methotrexate, the risk of GI perforation was highest among patients with exposure to nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), concomitant nonbiologic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs, and glucocorticoids. Biologic agents without glucocorticoid exposure were not a risk factor for perforation.

Conclusion

GI perforation is a rare but serious condition that affects patients with RA, most frequently in the lower GI tract. Clinicians should be aware of risk factors for GI perforation when managing RA patients, including age, history of diverticulitis, and use of glucocorticoids or NSAIDs.     

Complications during pneumatic dilation for achalasia or diffuse esophageal spasm

A retrospective cohort study was performed to assess risk factors, early clinical characteristics, and outcome of complications in patients undergoing pneumatic dilation. Of 178 patients with achalasia or diffuse esophageal spasm who underwent 236 dilations with a Browne-McHardy dilator, 16 patients experienced a complication (9.0%). Nine major complications developed: perforations (4), hematemesis (2), fever (2), and angina (1). A prior pneumatic dilation and use of inflation pressure ≥11 PSI were independent risk factors by multivariate analysis for developing a complication. An esophagram immediately following the dilation identified three of the four perforations. Three postdilation findings were identified as indicators of patients with an increased risk of having developed a perforation: blood on the dilator, tachycardia, and prolonged chest pain lasting >4 hr after dilation. In all patients incurring a major complication, one of the three indicators, or the complication itself was recognized within 5 hr of dilation. All patients with complications, including the four with perforation who received prompt surgical repair and esophagomyotomy, recovered uneventfully. The symptomatic relief of dysphagia in patients with perforation undergoing emergent surgical repair and esophagomyotomy was similar to patients undergoing elective esophagomyotomy. Conclusions: (1) Pneumatic dilation is a safe treatment of achalasia, with a 1.7% risk of perforation. (2) The risk of developing a complication is increased by having had a previous pneumatic dilation or by use of inflation pressures ≥11 psi. (3) All patients with a major complication were identified within 5 hr after dilation. (4) Complications following pneumatic dilation, if recognized and treated promptly, were not associated with adverse, long-term sequelae.     

Endoscopic Management for Delayed Diagnosis of a Foreign Body Penetrating the Esophagus into the Lung

A 31-year-old male presented with chest pain started after eating chicken about 2 weeks earlier. Upper endoscopy and Computed tomography scan of the chest revealed a sharp chicken bone penetrating the esophageal wall into the right lung. The foreign body was removed endoscopically using a rat-tooth forceps, followed by prophylactic placement of a metal stent across the esophageal perforation site. Foreign body-induced perforation is one of the common etiologies of benign esophageal perforations. Although the primary treatment is surgery, endoscopic therapy may be appropriate in individualized cases like our patient.     

Boerhaave's syndrome as the primary manifestation of adult eosinophilic esophagitis. Two case reports and a review of the literature

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has been associated with an increased risk of esophageal mucosal tears induced by vomiting to dislodge impacted food or following endoscopic procedures. However, Boerhaave's syndrome or transmural perforation of the organ resulting from vomiting induced to dislodge impacted food has rarely been reported. In this article, we present two male adult patients with long‐term esophageal symptoms who suffered from Boerhaave's syndrome after the impaction of food in the esophagus. Both patients required surgical management because of clinical and radiological signs of perforation. This rare complication of EoE has been documented in 11 other reports, predominantly affecting young men in whom EoE had not been previously diagnosed, despite the majority having esophageal symptoms and a history of atopy. There are only two published cases of esophageal perforation that presented in children, which were managed conservatively. Our two patients and 4 out of the 11 described in literature required surgery because of esophageal perforation. Our two cases involved closure of the perforation, while in three published reports, perforation resulted in a partial or complete esophagectomy. No cases have been published on Boerhaave's syndrome caused by EoE that ended in fatalities. It is important to note that esophageal perforation caused by vomiting is a potentially severe complication of EoE that is being increasingly described in literature. Therefore, patients with non‐traumatic Boerhaave's syndrome should be assessed for EoE, especially if they are young men who have a prior history of dysphagia and allergic manifestations.     

Risk factors for immediate complications after progressive pneumatic dilation for achalasia

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the risk factors of early complications after progressive pneumatic dilation for achalasia. METHODS: Five hundred four dilations were performed in 237 consecutive achalasic patients between 1980 and 1994 with the same technique: low-pressure pneumatic dilation every other day with balloons of increasing diameter until success criteria were obtained (depending on manometric examination and esophageal x-ray transit performed 24 h after each dilation). Clinical, radiographical, endoscopical, and manometrical data as technical procedure characteristics for patients with perforations or other early complications were compared with those without complications. RESULTS: We observed 15 complications (6% of patients): 7 perforations (3%), 3 asymptomatic esophageal mucosal tears, 4 esophageal hematomas, and 1 fever. Perforations occurred in 6 of 7 patients during the first dilation. The mean age was 68.5 yr in the group with complications versus 56.4 yr for the remainder (p < 0.05). Two deaths occurred in patients older than 90 yr. Instability of the balloon during dilations was noted in 8 of 15 cases of complications versus 57 of 222 patients (p < 0.05). No other data differed significantly. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed a low prevalence of early complications using this progressive technique. Patients with hiatal hernia, esophageal diverticulum, or vigorous achalasia may safely undergo progressive pneumatic dilation. Only patients older than 90 yr should be referred for progressive pneumatic dilation with caution. Most of perforations arose during the first dilation, but there was no predictive pretherapeutic factor of perforation.     

Retrograde tube drainage for esophageal anastomotic leaks and perforation

The mortality and morbidity of esophageal anastomotic leaks or perforations remain high. We performed retrograde transanastomotic esophageal sump tube drainages for esophageal anastomotic leak or perforation in three patients. Our method is a modified procedure of the T-tube drainage. The Levin gastric tube was simply inserted into the esophagus via anastomotic leak or perforation to develop a defined fistula. All three patients were treated with a satisfactory outcome. An advantage of this method is that it is technically easy, and available for patients whose diseases are difficult to treat with standard T-tube drainage. In addition, one of our patients was successfully managed non-operatively by fluoroscopical guidance. This retrograde esophageal sump tube drainage was technically very easy, safe and useful for esophageal anastomotic leaks or perforations.