Benign Esophageal Perforations Research Articles

332. NO NEED FOR A SPONGE! ENDOLUMINAL VACUUM THERAPY WITH A SIMPLE FENESTRATED SURGICAL DRAIN FOR MANAGEMENT OF BENIGN OESOPHAGEAL PERFORATIONS

Abstract Background Conventional endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVT) uses a sponge and can be an effective technique for management of benign esophageal perforations. We describe a unique method of positioning a simple fenestrated surgical drain with applied vacuum suction at or through the site of perforation. We aimed to see whether this was a safe and effective management approach for benign esophageal perforations whilst reducing the frequency and need for general anaesthetic (GA) based endoscopic exchanges. Methods A retrospective case-series was performed on consecutive patients with benign esophageal perforations from 2019 to 2023 at a tertiary hospital in the United Kingdom. Included patients had undergone initial management of benign esophageal perforation with EVT and fenestrated surgical drain. The drain was either placed in an intraluminal or intracavitary position depending on the size of perforation. Primary outcome assessed was complete epithelialisation of the fistulous orifice with EVT. Secondary outcomes included: 90-day mortality, Length of Stay (LOS), re-operation, complications, percentage of EVT procedures under GA, duration of EVT and interval between endoscopic exchanges. Results Seven patients met inclusion criteria (median age: 66 (23–79) years). In four instances aetiology of perforation was iatrogenic from gastroscopic procedures with remaining cases due to Boerhaave’s syndrome, foreign body ingestion and benign ulceration. Six patients achieved full healing of perforation with EVT, with one patient requiring oesophageal stenting. There was 0%, 90-day mortality and two patients underwent re-operation for thoracic drainage procedures. Median LOS was 22 days and mean duration of EVT was 14 days. Patients underwent on average 2.6 gastroscopies during admission, 75% of which were performed without GA. The mean interval between EVT repositioning/exchange was 8 days. Conclusion EVT with a surgical drain achieved complete healing in all but one case of benign esophageal perforation. In contrast to EVT with sponge it can be performed without GA and with a longer duration between drain exchanges and gastroscopies. Additionally, as the same drain can be used for the duration of therapy it may reduce material cost. Further studies should perform prospective and direct comparisons with alternative EVT strategies for benign esophageal perforations.

Risk factors for the poor prognosis of Benign esophageal perforation: 8-year experience

BackgroundEsophageal perforation (EP) has a high mortality rate and poor prognosis. This single-center retrospective study aims to analyze the related risk factors for benign EP.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 135 patients with benign EP admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from January 2012 to December 2020. Univariate and multivariate logistic analysis were performed to estimate risk factors for prognosis of esophageal perforation patients.ResultsThere were 118 EP patients with foreign body ingestion and 17 patients with nonforeign body ingestion. Fish bones (78/118) were the most common foreign body and most of the nonforeign EPs were caused by spontaneous esophageal rupture (14/17). Foreign body perforations occurred mostly in the upper thoracic segment (70/118) and middle thoracic segment (31/118), and spontaneous esophageal ruptures occurred mostly in the lower thoracic segment (15/17). Fifteen patients (11.1%) died during hospitalization or within one month of discharge. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that high white blood cell (WBC) levels [odds ratio (OR) = 2.229, 95% confidential interval (CI): 0.776–6.403, P = 0.025], chest or mediastinal emphysema (OR = 7.609, 95% CI: 2.418–23.946, P = 0.001), and time to treatment > 72 h (OR = 3.407, 95% CI: 0.674–17.233, P = 0.018) were independent risk factors for poor prognosis.ConclusionForeign body was the major reason for benign EP. High WBC level, chest or mediastinal emphysema and time to treatment > 72 h were risk factors for poor prognosis.

Does the Pittsburgh Severity Score Predict Patients’ Outcomes in Benign Esophageal Perforations?

Does the Pittsburgh Severity Score Predict Patients’ Outcomes in Benign Esophageal Perforations?

S1970 Utility of Covered Metal Stents in Esophageal Penetrating Injuries

INTRODUCTION: Management of esophageal perforations and leaks is traditionally managed via a surgical approach, however, here we show that self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) can be used to successfully treat esophageal injuries. CASE DESCRIPTION/METHODS: Case 1: A 27-yo man presented for GSW to the chest and went for surgical repair of the proximal esophagus. The esophageal defect was oversewn, but on day 7 an esophagram revealed an anterior leak. On EGD, there were 2 medium-sized perforations 30 cm from the incisors that were covered with a 12 cm × 20 mm fully covered stent under fluoroscopic guidance and anchored with two hemostatic clips. One week later the stent was exchanged because one perforation was still present. At two-weeks after the first EGD, the perforations had completely healed that was confirmed with esophagram. Case 2: A 21 year-old-woman presented for GSW to the neck who was found to have a T1 spinal cord injury with severe damage to the soft tissue. An esophageal perforation was found on a later esophagram and surgical repair failed to close the leak. EGD showed a perforation at 20 cm from the incisors that was treated with a 12 cm × 20 mm fully covered stent under fluoroscopic guidance and anchored with two hemostatic clips. She had a repeat EGD with stent exchange, but at week-two the tract had epithelialized that was further treated with APC and closure with 3 clips. DISCUSSION: Esophageal perforations are a life-threatening complication. If not corrected within the first 24 hours, morbidity and mortality increases significantly due to increased risk for fulminant mediastinitis and pleural contamination.1 Successful closure of benign esophageal perforations with stents is approximately 82%-100%.1 In a study of 15 patients, early (∼45 minutes) versus late (∼123 hours) esophageal stenting decreased hospital stay to 5 days compared to 44 days in the late group related to complications of sepsis and multiorgan failure.4 Serious complications from esophageal stenting are stent perforation, stent-related bleeding, and strictures which occurred at 2%, 0.8%, and 3.2%, respectively. In that same study, 73/340 experienced stent migration.5 A study of 44 patients comparing rates of esophageal migration with and without anchoring clips, migration occurred in 3/23 patients with hemostatic clips versus 12/21 without hemostatic clips.6 Here are two cases of esophageal perforation where fully covered esophageal SEMS were used without complication of stent migration due to anchoring clips.Figure 1.: Esophageal perforation.Figure 2.: SEMS covering perforation.Figure 3.: Healed perforation after SEMS.

Self-expanding metal stent in esophageal perforations and anastomotic leaks.

Placement of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) has emerged as a minimally invasive treatment option for esophageal perforation and leaks. The aim of our study was to assess the role of SEMS for the management of benign esophageal diseases such as perforations and anastomotic leaks. All patients (n = 26) who underwent SEMS placement for esophageal perforation and anastomotic leaks between May 2012 and February 2019 were included. Data wereanalyzed in relation to theindications, type of stent used, complications, and outcomes. Indications for stent placement included anastomotic leaks 65% (n = 17) and perforations 35% (n = 9). Fully covered SEMS (FCSEMS) was placed in 25 patients, and in 1, partially covered SEMS (PCSEMS) was placed. Stent placement was successful in all thepatients (n = 26). Four patients did not report for follow-up after stenting. Among the patients on follow-up, 91% (20/22) had healing of the mucosal defect. Stent-related complications were seen in 5 (23%) patients and included stent migration [3], reactive hyperplasia [1] and stricture [1]. Covered stent placement for a duration of 8weeks is technically safe and clinically effective as a first-line procedure for bridging and healing benign esophageal perforation and leaks.

Patient-Reported Long-Term Outcome is Superior After Treatment with Self-Expanding Metallic Stents in Esophageal Perforations.

Esophageal perforations are life threatening. Since the 1990s, placing of covered esophageal stents has become an alternative to surgery. Theoretically, this minimally invasive approach has several benefits; however, little data are available on long-term outcome in these patients. We aimed to evaluate how patient-reported outcome differed between full surgery and placement of self-expanding metallic stents when treating primary benign esophageal perforations. Of 48 patients treated at our hospital in 2000-2015, 23 were alive and asked to answer three questionnaires. We used a short clinical questionnaire, the QLQ-OG25 from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and a simplified quality-of-life instrument, the Check Your Health. Non-parametric statistics were used to evaluate differences between the two groups. In all, 20 (87%) individuals (13 men, 64 years of age) responded. At survey, surgical patients had lost 13 kg of initial weight, compared to no weight loss in the self-expanding metallic stents group (p = 0.01). This involuntary weight loss worried patients according to the QLQ-OG25; otherwise patient-experience measures did not differ between groups. For quality of life, surgical patients scored significantly lower physical health, emotional well-being, social functioning, and overall quality of life after treatment, but after stenting no differences were seen. In contrast to stenting, surgical treatment was associated with involuntary, and worrisome, weight loss as well as reduced quality of life. We therefore believe that self-expanding metallic stents should be used when possible in treating benign esophageal perforations.

Early diagnosis is associated with improved clinical outcomes in benign esophageal perforation: an individual patient data meta-analysis

BackgroundTime of diagnosis (TOD) of benign esophageal perforation is regarded as an important risk factor for clinical outcome, although convincing evidence is lacking. The aim of this study is to assess whether time between onset of perforation and diagnosis is associated with clinical outcome in patients with iatrogenic esophageal perforation (IEP) and Boerhaave’s syndrome (BS).MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane library through June 2018 to identify studies. Authors were invited to share individual patient data and a meta-analysis was performed (PROSPERO: CRD42018093473). Patients were subdivided in early (≤ 24 h) and late (> 24 h) TOD and compared with mixed effects multivariable analysis while adjusting age, gender, location of perforation, initial treatment and center. Primary outcome was overall mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, re-interventions and ICU admission.ResultsOur meta-analysis included IPD of 25 studies including 576 patients with IEP and 384 with BS. In IEP, early TOD was not associated with overall mortality (8% vs. 13%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 0.8–5.1), but was associated with a 23% decrease in ICU admissions (46% vs. 69%, OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2–7.2), a 22% decrease in re-interventions (23% vs. 45%, OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.2–6.7) and a 36% decrease in length of hospital stay (14 vs. 22 days, p < 0.001), compared with late TOD. In BS, no associations between TOD and outcomes were found. When combining IEP and BS, early TOD was associated with a 6% decrease in overall mortality (10% vs. 16%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1–3.9), a 19% decrease in re-interventions (26% vs. 45%, OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1–3.2) and a 35% decrease in mean length of hospital stay (16 vs. 22 days, p = 0.001), compared with late TOD.ConclusionsThis individual patient data meta-analysis confirms the general opinion that an early (≤ 24 h) compared to a late diagnosis (> 24 h) in benign esophageal perforations, particularly in IEP, is associated with improved clinical outcome.

Clinical score predicting a successful endoscopic approach of esophageal anastomotic leaks: external validation.

Recently, a clinical prediction rule has been proposed to predict the chance of successful endoscopic stenting in benign esophageal anastomotic leakage, perforation and fistula. We aimed to validate this score in a cohort of patients with anastomotic leaks managed with self-expanding metal esophageal stents, by assessing technical and clinical success rates and comparing the agreement between the predicted and the actual clinical success. A multicenter retrospective cohort study including patients submitted to endoscopic stenting due to anastomotic leak was conducted. Variables of the score (leak size, location and C-reactive protein) were collected and the chance of success (≤50, 50-70 and ≥70%) and its accuracy was assessed. Fifty-three patients, submitted to esophageal stenting after cancer (n = 47) and bariatric surgery were included. Clinical success was achieved in 62% of patients. The area under the ROC curve to differentiate between successful and failed therapies showed a good discriminative power of the score (AUC 0.705; P < 0.01). For a predicted chance of success >50%, the positive predictive value was 72.5%; for a chance of success ≤50%, the negative predictive value was 69.2%. The application of this predictive model in patients with anastomotic leaks proved to be valid in a different cohort from that in which it was derived. Its usefulness in clinical practice may be anticipated, favoring stenting in patients with a chance of success >50%. However, we must be cautious in patients with a lower probability of success and a case-by-case decision should be made.

The decrease of BMI and albumin levels influences the rate of anastomotic leaks in patients following reconstruction after emergency diverting esophagectomy.

Diverting esophagectomies in cases of benign esophageal perforations remain rare but potentially life saving procedures. Usually, an esophagostoma and a feeding jejunostomy or gastrostomy are created, and patients are given time to recover from the emergency situation. However, little is known about morbidity and mortality as well as the optimal timing for a staged reconstruction. Patients with benign esophageal perforations were selected from our retrospective database. Perforations in esophageal malignancies were excluded to avoid bias on patients' general outcome. Clinical parameters and especially, the influence of the nutritional status indicated by the BMI (Body Mass Index) as well as serum albumin levels (g/l) were analyzed. A total of 24 patients with diverting esophagectomies were identified. Of these, 13 (54.2%) patients received a staged reconstruction after a median of 143.0days. Patients presenting for their staged reconstruction demonstrated a significantly decreased level of their BMI (p = 0.026) as compared to their prior hospitalization. Interestingly, the relative decrease of BMI (8.5kg/m2 vs. 4.3kg/m2) and albumin levels (6.5g/l vs. 0.0g/l) was significantly different in patients with or without anastomotic leaks between both surgeries (p = 0.021; p = 0.034, respectively). In addition, higher rates of overall complications were associated with an increased rate of malnutrition. The relative amount of malnutrition indicated by BMI or serum albumin levels influences the rate of anastomotic leaks and general complications in patients with staged reconstruction after diverting esophagectomy for non-malignant esophageal perforations. Hence, reconstruction should be done as fast as possible to reduce the amount of malnutrition and a frequent assessment of the nutritional status must be done during recovery from the emergency surgery.

P197 LONG-TERM HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE AFTER BENIGN ESOPHAGEAL PERFORATION

Abstract Aim This study aims to evaluate long-term outcome and health related quality of life in patients with benign esophageal perforations. Background and Methods Esophageal perforation is associated with high morbidity and mortality. In addition to surgical treatment, endoscopic endoluminal stent placement and endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) are established methods in the management of this emergency condition. As health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is becoming a major issue in the evaluation of any therapeutic intervention not much is known about HRQoL, particular in the long-term follow-up of patients treated for benign esophageal perforation with different treatment strategies. Patients treated for benign esophageal perforation at the University Hospital Cologne from January 2003 to December 2014 were therefore investigated. Primary outcome and management of esophageal perforation were documented and long-term quality of life was assessed using the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI), the Health-Related Quality of Life Index (HRQL) for patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaires for general and esophageal cancer specific QoL (QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OES18). Results Patients were divided based on primary treatment into an endoscopic (46.5%), surgical (34.5%) and conservative treatment group (19%). Short- and long-term outcome, as well as quality of life were compared. HRQoL was measured after a median follow-up of 49 months. HRQoL was generally reduced in patients with benign esophageal perforation. Endoscopically treated patients showed the highest GIQLI overall score and highest EORTC general health status, followed by the conservative and the surgical group. Conclusion HRQoL in patients with benign esophageal perforation is reduced even in the long-term follow-up. Temporary stent or EVT is effective and provides a good alternative to surgery not only in the short-term but also in the long-term follow-up.

P75 CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF THE IMPACT OF OESOPHAGEAL STENTS IN THE MANAGEMENT OF OESOPHAGEAL ANASTOMOTIC LEAKS AND BENIGN OESOPHAGEAL PERFORATIONS: AN UPDATED SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Abstract Aims This updated systematic review aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of oesophageal stents in these two scenarios. Background Endoscopic placement of oesophageal stents may be used in benign oesophageal perforation and oesophageal anastomotic leakage to control sepsis and reduce mortality and morbidity by avoiding thoracotomy. Methods A systematic literature search of all published studies reporting use of metallic and plastic stents in the management of postoperative anastomotic leaks, spontaneous and iatrogenic oesophageal perforations were identified. Primary outcomes were technical (deploying ≥1 stent to occlude site of leakage with no evidence of leakage of contrast within 24-48 hours) and clinical success (complete healing of perforation or leakage by placement of single or multiple stents irrespective of whether the stent was left in situ or was removed). Secondary outcomes were stent migration, perforation and erosion and mortality rates. Subgroup analysis were performed for plastic versus metallic stents and anastomotic leaks versus perforations separately. Results A total of 66 studies (n=1752 patients) were included. Technical and clinical success rates were 96% and 87%, respectively. Plastic stents had significantly higher migration rates (24% vs 16%, p=0.001) and repositioning (11% vs 3%, p&lt;0.001) and lower technical success (91% vs 95%, p=0.032) than metallic stents. In patients with anastomotic leaks, plastic stents were associated with higher stent migration (26% vs 15%, p=0.034), perforation (2% vs 0%, p=0.013), repositioning (10% vs 0%, p&lt;0.001) and lower technical success (95% vs 100%, p=0.002). In patients with perforations only, plastic stents were associated with significantly lower technical success (85% vs 99%, p&lt;0.001). Conclusions Covered metallic oesophageal stents appear to be more effective than plastic stents in the management of oesophageal perforation and anastomotic leakage. However, quality of evidence of generally poor and high-quality randomised trial is needed to further evaluate best management option for oesophageal perforation and anastomotic leakage.

Critical Appraisal of the Impact of Oesophageal Stents in the Management of Oesophageal Anastomotic Leaks and Benign Oesophageal Perforations: An Updated Systematic Review.

Endoscopic placement of oesophageal stents may be used in benign oesophageal perforation and oesophageal anastomotic leakage to control sepsis and reduce mortality and morbidity by avoiding thoracotomy. This updated systematic review aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of oesophageal stents in these two scenarios. A systematic literature search of all published studies reporting use of metallic and plastic stents in the management of post-operative anastomotic leaks, spontaneous and iatrogenic oesophageal perforations were identified. Primary outcomes were technical (deploying ≥ 1 stent to occlude site of leakage with no evidence of leakage of contrast within 24-48h) and clinical success (complete healing of perforation or leakage by placement of single or multiple stents irrespective of whether the stent was left in situ or was removed). Secondary outcomes were stent migration, perforation and erosion, and mortality rates. Subgroup analysis was performed for plastic versus metallic stents and anastomotic leaks versus perforations separately. A total of 66 studies (n = 1752 patients) were included. Technical and clinical success rates were 96% and 87%, respectively. Plastic stents had significantly higher migration rates (24% vs 16%, p = 0.001) and repositioning (11% vs 3%, p < 0.001) and lower technical success (91% vs 95%, p = 0.032) than metallic stents. In patients with anastomotic leaks, plastic stents were associated with higher stent migration (26% vs 15%, p = 0.034), perforation (2% vs 0%, p = 0.013), repositioning (10% vs 0%, p < 0.001), and lower technical success (95% vs 100%, p = p = 0.002). In patients with perforations only, plastic stents were associated with significantly lower technical success (85% vs 99%, p < 0.001). Covered metallic oesophageal stents appear to be more effective than plastic stents in the management of oesophageal perforation and anastomotic leakage. However, quality of evidence of generally poor and high-quality randomised trial is needed to further evaluate best management option for oesophageal perforation and anastomotic leakage.

Management of Benign Esophageal Perforation in the National Inpatient Sample

Lui, Natalie MD; Bhandari, Prasha MPH; Backhus, Leah MD, MPH, FACS; Liou, Douglas MD; Shrager, Joseph MD; Berry, Mark F. MD Author Information

PS01.082: ESOPHAGEAL PERFORATIONS: WHAT TO DO?

Abstract Background Esophagus perforations are one of the most severe lesions of the digestive tract. Until now the treatment continues to be controversial, with mortality greater than 30% of cases, mainly with a thoracic location. Severity is determinate by the progression of infection due to anatomical characteristics of the mediastinum. The location, size of the perforation and the evolution time determine the treatment to follow. In order to assess the results obtained and the different management options we present a series of 9 patients, with benign esophageal perforations, treated in our center during the last 5 years. Methods We designed an observational study in which we identify retrospectively the results of our series during the last five years (From 2013 to 2018). We analysed the following variables: Characteristics of patients, medical and surgical management, morbidity and mortality Results In all series, 5 of 9 patients received surgical treatment (55,5%), In the remaining three cases, simple suture and placement of drainages was performed. Conservative treatment was the first management attempt in the last four cases (44,5%), all of them due to impaction of food bolus or foreign body. Of all series evolved favourably with a non-negligible morbidity and continued ambulatory follow up. There was no mortality. Conclusion It is difficult to establish a protocol of action in patients with esophageal perforation. We have obtained good results by individualizing each case and adjusting the type of treatment to the needs of each patient, from a conservative attitude to radical surgery. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Treatment of benign perforations and leaks of the esophagus: factors associated with success after stent placement.

Self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) is effective and safe for the treatment of benign esophageal perforations or leaks. The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with clinical success after SEMS placement. Patients who received SEMS placement for treatment of benign esophageal perforations or leaks were retrospectively identified. These patients were analyzed for factors associated with clinical success and complications. A total of 31 patients underwent stent insertion for benign esophageal perforations (n = 11) or anastomotic leaks (n = 20). Clinical success was achieved in twenty-three patients (74.2%) after initial stent insertion. In multivariate analysis, early stent insertion within 1day was identified as a significant independent predictor of successful sealing (Odds ratio = 3.14, 95% CI 1.36-7.24; p = 0.013). The anastomotic leak group needed a longer stent dwelling time (≥ 4weeks) compared to the perforation group (75.0% vs. 27.3%, p = 0.022). Clinical success was significantly associated with early stent insertion. The dwelling time of stent was shorter for benign perforations compared to anastomotic leaks.

Stent placement for benign esophageal leaks, perforations, and fistulae: a clinical prediction rule for successful leakage control.

Sealing esophageal leaks by stent placement allows healing in 44 % - 94 % of patients. We aimed to develop a prediction rule to predict the chance of successful stent therapy. In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, patients with benign upper gastrointestinal leakage treated with stent placement were included. We used logistic regression analysis including four known clinical predictors of stent therapy outcome. The model performance to predict successful stent therapy was evaluated in an independent validation sample. We included etiology, location, C-reactive protein, and size of the leak as clinical predictors. The model was estimated from 145 patients (derivation sample), and 59 patients were included in the validation sample. Stent therapy was successful in 55.9 % and 67.8 % of cases, respectively. The predicted probability of successful stent therapy was significantly higher in success patients compared with failure patients in both the derivation (P < 0.001) and validation (P < 0.001) samples. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 74.1 % in the derivation sample and 84.7 % in the validation sample. When the model predicted ≥ 70 % chance of success, the positive predictive value was 79 % in the derivation sample and 87 % in the validation sample. When the model predicted ≤ 50 % chance of success, the negative predictive value was 64 % and 86 %, respectively. This prediction rule, consisting of four clinical predictors, could identify patients with esophageal leaks who were likely to benefit from or fail on stent therapy. The prediction rule can support clinical decision-making when the predicted probability of success is ≥ 70 % or ≤ 50 %.

A Nationwide Rise in the Use of Stents for Benign Esophageal Perforation

Surgical repair or drainage is the standard treatment for benign esophageal perforation. The United States Food and Drug Administration has approved the use of esophageal stents for the management of malignant esophageal stricture or fistula, or both. We hypothesize that increasing enthusiasm and experience with esophageal stents has led to greater use of stents for the management of benign esophageal perforation. We performed a retrospective cohort study (2007 to 2014) of patients with benign esophageal perforation using MarketScan (Thomson Reuters, New York, NY), a commercial claims database. Patients had 6 months of follow-up. Regression was used for risk-adjustment. Benign esophageal perforation was treated in659 patients (mean age, 49 years; 41% women), comprising surgical repair in 449 (69%), surgical drainage in 110 (17%), and stent in 100 (15%). Stent use increased from 7% in 2007 to 30% in 2014 (p < 0.001 for trend). Over the same period, surgical repair decreased from 71% to 53% (p= 0.001 for trend), but surgical drainage did not change (p= 0.24). After adjustment for other factors that could vary over time, stent use increased by 28% per year (incidence rate ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.17 to 1.39). Changes in risk-adjusted deaths, discharges home, readmissions, or costs over the same period were not significant (all p > 0.05 for trend). The use of stents for the management of benign esophageal perforation has increased by over fourfold in just 8 years, but short-term outcomes have not changed over time for this population of patients. A national registry for off-label use of esophageal stents may clarify the indications for and risks and benefits of stenting benign esophageal perforations.

Clinical Outcomes, Efficacy, and Adverse Events in Patients Undergoing Esophageal Stent Placement for Benign Indications: A Large Multicenter Study.

Esophageal stents are commonly used to treat benign esophageal conditions including refractory benign esophageal strictures, anastomotic strictures, fistulae, perforations and anastomotic leaks. Data on outcomes in these settings remain limited. We performed a retrospective multicenter study of patients who underwent fully or partially covered self-expandable stent placement for benign esophageal diseases. Esophageal stent placements were performed for the following indications: (1) benign refractory esophageal strictures, (2) surgical anastomotic strictures, (3) esophageal perforations, (4) esophageal fistulae, and (5) surgical anastomotic leaks. A total of 70 patients underwent esophageal stent placement for benign esophageal conditions. A total of 114 separate procedures were performed. The most common indication for esophageal stent placement was refractory benign esophageal stricture (48.2%). Global treatment success rate was 55.7%. Treatment success rate was 33.3% in refractory benign strictures, 23.1% in anastomotic strictures, 100% in perforations, 71.4% in fistulae, and 80% in anastomotic leaks. Stent migration was noted in 28 of 70 patients (40%), most commonly seen in refractory benign strictures. This is one of the largest studies to date of esophageal stents to treat benign esophageal diseases. Success rates are lowest in benign esophageal strictures. These patients have few other options beyond chronic dilations, feeding tubes, and surgery, and fully covered self-expandable metallic stent give patients a chance to have their problem fixed endoscopically and still eat by mouth. Perforations, fistulas, and leaks respond very well to esophageal stenting, and stenting should be considered as a first-line therapy in these settings.

Polymeric Biodegradable Stent Insertion in the Esophagus.

Esophageal stent insertion has been used as a well-accepted and effective alternative to manage and improve the quality of life for patients diagnosed with esophageal diseases and disorders. Current stents are either permanent or temporary and are fabricated from either metal or plastic. The partially covered self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) has a firm anchoring effect and prevent stent migration, however, the hyperplastic tissue reaction cause stent restenosis and make it difficult to remove. A fully covered SEMS and self-expanding plastic stent (SEPS) reduced reactive hyperplasia but has a high migration rate. The main advantage that polymeric biodegradable stents (BDSs) have over metal or plastic stents is that removal is not require and reduce the need for repeated stent insertion. But the slightly lower radial force of BDS may be its main shortcoming and a post-implant problem. Thus, strengthening support of BDS is a content of the research in the future. BDSs are often temporarily effective in esophageal stricture to relieve dysphagia. In the future, it can be expect that biodegradable drug-eluting stents (DES) will be available to treat benign esophageal stricture, perforations or leaks with additional use as palliative modalities for treating malignant esophageal stricture, as the bridge to surgery or to maintain luminal patency during neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

Pneumomediastinum: Can we tell prognosis upon presentation?

AimPneumomediastinum is an uncommon condition with differential diagnoses of very different prognosis. The aim of the present study was to retrospectively review patients who presented with pneumomediastinum, and to look for salient features on presentation to establish the difference between benign spontaneous pneumomediastinum (SPM) and oesophageal perforation (Boerhaave's syndrome) on presentation.Patients and MethodsFrom 1 July 1999 to 30 June 2013, 163 cases of pneumomediastinum, excluding those with trauma and procedure‐related episodes, presented through the Accident and Emergency Department to the Hospital Authority hospitals in the New Territories East Cluster. There were 142 SPM cases, and 21 were oesophageal perforations.ResultsPresenting features, hospital stay and outcomes were analysed. Fever at presentation (P = 0.030), history of vomiting (P = 0.028), pneumothorax on initial chest radiograph (CXR) (P = 0.044) and age ≥ 28 years (P = 0.021) were found to be independent predictors for non‐SPM diagnoses.ConclusionSPM is still more common than oesophageal perforation in those without any history of trauma or recent instrumentation, and runs a benign course. However, the presence of fever, a history of vomiting, pneumothorax on initial CXR and patient age over 28 years should mandate further investigations to rule out more sinister diagnoses and to administer appropriate management.