Management of esophageal perforations
- 29 April 2010
- journal article
- Published by Springer Nature in Surgical Endoscopy
- Vol. 24 (11) , 2809-2813
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1054-6
Abstract
Esophageal perforations remain a life-threatening event requiring rapid diagnosis and treatment. Surgical repair and interventional endoscopic or conservative treatment are the common treatment methods. From 1998 to 2006, the authors retrospectively analyzed 62 patients treated for esophageal perforation. Data were evaluated for cause of perforation, symptoms, therapeutic regimen, complications, and mortality. The causes of perforation were iatrogenic or suicidal (n = 33) or spontaneous (n = 29). In the first group, the causes were dilation of stenosis (n = 16), endoscopy (n = 7), transesophageal echography (n = 4), ingestion of acid or leach (n = 2), intubation (n = 2), ingestion of a foreign body (n = 1), and migration of a screw after osteosynthesis (n = 1). The spontaneous perforations were caused by tumors (n = 19), Boerhaave syndrome (n = 6), unknown origin (n = 3), and Barrett’s ulcer (n = 1). The most frequent symptoms were dysphagia (n = 50), pain (n = 35), fever (n = 24), and vomiting (n = 18). At the time of perforation, 28 patients presented with cancer. Of these 28 patients, 18 had esophageal cancer. The treatment included surgery (n = 32), which consisted of double-layer suture (n = 26) or esophageal resection (n = 6). A total of 30 patients were treated interventionally with a stent (n = 21), clips (n = 1), or without further measures (n = 8). The patients in the surgery group presented with severe primary and postoperative general conditions including renal failure (25%), respiratory insufficiency (65.5%), and need for catecholamines (62.5%). This multiorgan involvement was found only occasionally in the conservative group. The overall hospital mortality rate was 14.5%, involving 9 patients (5 in the surgery group and 4 in the conservative group). Early treatment led to better survival than late treatment with a delay exceeding 24 h. The treatment method still must be chosen on an individual basis. It appears that surgical treatment is necessary in cases of severe general conditions. The data from this study show that surgical repair and conservative treatment may be used successfully. The best outcome was obtained after immediate treatment.Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- Endoscopic therapy for esophageal perforation or anastomotic leak with a self-expandable metallic stentSurgical Endoscopy, 2009
- Esophageal Perforations: New Perspectives and Treatment ParadigmsJournal of Trauma: Injury, Infection & Critical Care, 2007
- Esophageal Perforation in AdultsAnnals of Surgery, 2005
- Esophageal perforation: the importance of early diagnosis and primary repairDiseases of the Esophagus, 2004
- Evolving options in the management of esophageal perforationPublished by Elsevier ,2004
- Boerhaave's syndrome: primary repair vs. esophageal resection—case reports and meta-analysis of the literatureJournal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2003
- Management of Esophageal PerforationSurgery Today, 2001
- Esophageal perforation: Emphasis on managementThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 1996
- Esophageal perforation: A continuing challengeThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 1992
- Diagnosis and Recommended Management of Esophageal Perforation and RuptureThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 1986