Outcome after iatrogenic esophageal perforation

Objectives: Iatrogenic perforations are the most common cause of esophageal perforation. We present our experience mainly based on a non-operative treatment approach as well as long-term outcome in these patients.

Materials and methods: Twenty-one patients were treated for iatrogenic esophageal perforation at Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål from February 2007 to March 2014. The etiology of perforation was dilation of benign stricture in eight patients, either dilation, stenting or stent removal in four with malignant stenosis, during diagnostic endoscopy in four, removal of foreign body in two and by other causes in three patients, respectively. After median 82 months, 10 patients alive (47.6%) were sent questionnaires about dysphagia, HRQoL and fatigue.

Results: Median age at time of treatment was 66 years. Median in-hospital stay and mortality were 10.5 days and 4.8%, respectively. Initial treatment in 15 patients (71.4%) was non-surgical of whom one needed delayed debridement for pleural empyema. Initial treatment in six patients (28.6%) was surgical of whom three needed delayed stenting. Altogether 14 patients (66.7%) were stented. Eight (57.1%) had restenting. Median number of stents used was 1 (1–4). The stents were removed after median 36 days. The perforations healed after 2.5 months. After median 82 months, the patients reported reduced HRQoL. There was no significant difference regarding level of dysphagia and fatigue.

Conclusions: We report satisfactorily short-term and long-term results of iatrogenic esophageal perforations. Mortality was low and HRQoL was deteriorated. Dysphagia and fatigue were comparable to a reference population.     

Treatment of cervical esophageal perforation caused by foreign bodies

In this article, we reviewed our experience of treatment of cervical esophageal perforation caused by foreign bodies. Between 1980 and 2010, 42 patients were included in this study. There were 18 women and 24 men with a median age of 54 years. We divided the patients into three groups: the patients whose foreign bodies could not be extracted by otolaryngologists using endoscope (n= 7), the patients who had some signs of abscess formation but the foreign bodies had been extracted using endoscope (n= 25), and the patients who had no signs of abscess formation and the foreign bodies had been extracted (n= 10). We treated the patients of the three groups with surgical treatment, drainage alone, and conservative treatment, respectively. The outcome of the current series was favorable. Our experience suggested that most of the cases can be treated conservatively or by drainage alone. If the foreign bodies of the esophagus could not be extracted using endoscope, surgical treatment including the removal of the foreign bodies, primary repair, and drainage should be performed.     

Successfully treated case of cervical abscess and mediastinitis due to esophageal perforation after gastrointestinal endoscopy

Perforations of the esophagus are uncommon complications of flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy. Perforations after endoscopy are likely to occur in the cervical esophagus, where fiber insertion is difficult anatomically. The diagnosis should be made as soon as possible, because mediastinitis and sepsis frequently develop following esophageal perforations. The surgical strategies are dependent on the location of the perforations and the condition of the patients. For a successful outcome, surgery is a preferred treatment for most perforation cases, and non-operative treatment, such as antibiotics, parental nutrition, and no food intake by mouth, should be applied carefully.     

Outcome after accidental food bolus-induced esophageal perforation

Objectives: Food bolus-induced esophageal perforation is much more seldom than iatrogenic and emetic esophageal rupture. We present results from a non-operative treatment approach as well as long-term functional outcome.

Materials and methods: Medical records of 10 consecutive patients with food bolus-induced esophageal perforation from October 2007 to May 2015 were retrospectively registered in a database. Six patients developed perforation related to endoscopic removal of impacted food, and four during esophageal passage of bone, meat or bread. Treatment was sealing the perforation by stenting (n?=?7) with (n?=?4) or without (n?=?3) chest tube drainage, chest tube drainage (n?=?1), observation (n?=?1) and gastroesophageal resection (n?=?1) because of concomitant emesis of gastric effluent. After median 51 months nine patients reported about dysphagia, fatigue and health-related quality of life.

Results: Ten patients aged median 62.5 years (range 30–85) stayed in our hospital for 12 days (5–68 days). There was no treatment-related mortality. Nine patients were alive 63 months (18–126) after perforation. Five needed restenting (leakage, migration, impacted stent), two had drainage of a mediastinal abscess, one patient developed a transient esophagobronchial fistula. Dysphagia score was 0 (0–1). One patient developed dysphagia for some solid food. Scores for fatigue and HRQoL was similar to a Norwegian reference population.

Conclusion: Treatment mainly with a non-operative approach occurred without mortality. Complications were handled by restenting and abscess drainage. Functional result for dysphagia was excellent. Interesting results on fatigue and HRQoL must be interpreted with caution because of a limited patient material.     

Conservative management of esophageal perforation after pneumatic dilatation for achalasia

PURPOSE: To assess the results and indications of conservative management of esophageal perforation following pneumatic dilatation for achalasia.PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirteen esophageal perforations complicating 524 dilatations in 412 patients (3%) were diagnosed by esophagogram. Medical treatment consisted of nasogastric succion, antibiotics and pleural drainage, if necessary. Conservative surgical treatment included left thoracophrenotomy, perforation closure, controlateral myotomy and anterior fundoplication. Surgical decision was based upon clinical and radiological parameters. Functional outcome was assessed by the means of the Eckardt's grading score.RESULTS: Six patients were successfully managed by medical treatment. Seven patients underwent conservative surgery, three of whom after failure of medical treatment. The presence of a pneumomediastinum at initial presentation led to immediate (n=2) or delayed (n=2) surgery in all instances. No patients died. In the surgical group, morbidity consisted of one wound infection, one pleural effusion and one venous thrombosis. One severe chest infection occurred in the medical group. Oral feeding was reintroduced after a median of 10 and 11 days in the surgical and medical groups, respectively. Functional results were satisfactory and similar in both groups.CONCLUSION: Conservative medical or surgical management of oesophageal perforation following pneumatic dilatation is safe, if the diagnosis is done early. Pneumomediastinum at initial presentation seems to predict failure of conservative medical treatment.     

Oesophageal perforation by an anterior cervical fixation device: management in debilitated patients

Oesophageal perforation following anterior cervical fixation has been reported in the neurosurgical and orthopaedic literature as a rare complication of such procedure. The complications associated with oesophageal perforation may range from minor symptoms to mediastinitis and death. We report two oesophageal perforations following cervical fixation device migration in patients with poor prognosis, managed successfully with conservative surgical and endoscopic techniques.     

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.     

Metastatic esophageal cancer leading to gastric perforation after repeat peg placement

Various complications from percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy have been reported. We describe a case of pneumoperitoneum after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement because of gastric wall weakening from malignant stomal seeding and, possibly, from chemoradiation.     

Delayed presentation of intrathoracic esophageal perforation after pneumatic dilation for achalasia

Pneumatic dilation （PD） is considered to be a safe and effective first line therapy for achalasia. The major adverse event caused by PD is esophageal perforation but an immediate gastrografin test may not always detect a perforation. It has been reported that delayed management of perforation for more than 24 h is associated with high mortality. Surgery is the treatment of choice within 24 h, but the management of delayed perforation remains controversial. Hereby, we report a delayed presentation of intrathoracic esophageal perforation following PD in a 48-year-old woman who suffered from achalasia. She completely recovered after intensive medical care. A review of the literature is also discussed.     

Gastropericardial fistula resulting from ulcerative perforation of the reconstructed gastric tube after surgery for esophageal cancer

Gastropericardial fistulae are rare and may cause fatal complications such as acute purulent carditis and cardiac tamponade. The present report describes a case of a gastropericardial fistula caused by a peptic ulcer perforating a retrosternal reconstructed gastric tube 2 years after subtotal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surgical intervention involved left thoracotomy, pericardium fenestration, and drainage of the pericardium and left thoracic cavity. The patient suffered postoperative complications including septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and cardiac insufficiency; however, he recovered after successful surgical intervention. In this case, the withdrawal of proton pump inhibitors and the patient’s sustained drinking habit after esophageal replacement surgery may have caused peptic ulcers in the gastric tube. Early diagnosis and surgical treatment of gastropericardial fistulae are essential to avoid fatal complications.