OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcome of aggressive conservative therapy in patients with esophageal perforation. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The treatment of esophageal perforation remains controversial with a bias toward early primary repair, resection, and/or proximal diversion. This review evaluates an alternate approach with a bias toward aggressive drainage of fluid collections and frequent CT and gastographin UGI examinations to evaluate progress. METHODS: From 1992 to 2004, 47 patients with esophageal perforation (10 proximal, 37 thoracic) were treated (18 patients early [<24 hours], 29 late). There were 31 male and 16 females (ages 18-90 years). The etiology was iatrogenic (25), spontaneous (14), trauma (3), dissecting thoracic aneurysm (3), and 1 each following a Stretta procedure and Blakemore tube placement. RESULTS: Six of 10 cervical perforations underwent surgery (3 primary repair, 3 abscess drainage). Nine of 10 perforations healed at discharge. In 37 thoracic perforations, 2 underwent primary repair (1 iatrogenic, 1 spontaneous) and 4 underwent limited thoracotomy. Thirty-4 patients (4 cervical, 28 thoracic) underwent nonoperative treatment. Thirteen of the 14 patients with spontaneous perforation (thoracic) underwent initial nonoperative care. Overall mortality was 4.2% (2 of 47 patients). These deaths represent 2 of 37 thoracic perforations (5.4%). There were no deaths in the 34 patients treated nonoperatively. Esophageal healing occurred in 43 of 45 surviving patients (96%). Subsequent operations included colon interposition in 2, esophagectomy for malignancy in 3, and esophagectomy for benign stricture in 2. CONCLUSIONS: Aggressive treatment of sepsis and control of esophageal leaks leak lowers mortality and morbidity, allow esophageal healing, and avoid major surgery in most patients.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcome of aggressive conservative therapy in patients with esophageal perforation. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The treatment of esophageal perforation remains controversial with a bias toward early primary repair, resection, and/or proximal diversion. This review evaluates an alternate approach with a bias toward aggressive drainage of fluid collections and frequent CT and gastographin UGI examinations to evaluate progress. METHODS: From 1992 to 2004, 47 patients with esophageal perforation (10 proximal, 37 thoracic) were treated (18 patients early [<24 hours], 29 late). There were 31 male and 16 females (ages 18-90 years). The etiology was iatrogenic (25), spontaneous (14), trauma (3), dissecting thoracic aneurysm (3), and 1 each following a Stretta procedure and Blakemore tube placement. RESULTS: Six of 10 cervical perforations underwent surgery (3 primary repair, 3 abscess drainage). Nine of 10 perforations healed at discharge. In 37 thoracic perforations, 2 underwent primary repair (1 iatrogenic, 1 spontaneous) and 4 underwent limited thoracotomy. Thirty-4 patients (4 cervical, 28 thoracic) underwent nonoperative treatment. Thirteen of the 14 patients with spontaneous perforation (thoracic) underwent initial nonoperative care. Overall mortality was 4.2% (2 of 47 patients). These deaths represent 2 of 37 thoracic perforations (5.4%). There were no deaths in the 34 patients treated nonoperatively. Esophageal healing occurred in 43 of 45 surviving patients (96%). Subsequent operations included colon interposition in 2, esophagectomy for malignancy in 3, and esophagectomy for benign stricture in 2. CONCLUSIONS: Aggressive treatment of sepsis and control of esophageal leaks leak lowers mortality and morbidity, allow esophageal healing, and avoid major surgery in most patients.
Authors: G Lionel Zumbro; Mark P Anstadt; Kwabena Mawulawde; Shabir Bhimji; Marco A Paliotta; Ganesh Pai Journal: Am Surg Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 0.688
Authors: Otto Kollmar; Werner Lindemann; Sven Richter; Ingo Steffen; Georg Pistorius; Martin K Schilling Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2003 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: L Martinez; S Rivas; F Hernández; L F Avila; L Lassaletta; J Murcia; P Olivares; A Queizán; A Fernandez; M López-Santamaría; J A Tovar Journal: J Pediatr Surg Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 2.545
Authors: Paul D Kiernan; Michael J Sheridan; Eric Elster; John Rhee; Lucas Collazo; William D Byrne; Thomas Fulcher; Vivian Hettrick; Betty Vaughan; Paula Graling Journal: South Med J Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 0.954
Authors: J A Salo; J O Isolauri; L J Heikkilä; H T Markkula; L O Heikkinen; E O Kivilaakso; S P Mattila Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 1993-12 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Sven Christian Schmidt; Stefan Strauch; Thomas Rösch; Wilfried Veltzke-Schlieker; Sven Jonas; Johann Pratschke; Henning Weidemann; Peter Neuhaus; Guido Schumacher Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-04-29 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Fausto Biancari; Juha Saarnio; Ari Mennander; Linda Hypén; Paulina Salminen; Kari Kuttila; Mikael Victorzon; Camilla Böckelman; Enrico Tarantino; Olivier Tiffet; Vesa Koivukangas; Jon Arne Søreide; Asgaut Viste; Luigi Bonavina; Halla Vidarsdóttir; Tomas Gudbjartsson Journal: World J Surg Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Andrej Udelnow; Markus Huber-Lang; Markus Juchems; Karl Träger; Doris Henne-Bruns; Peter Würl Journal: World J Surg Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 3.352