Literature DB >> 28575240

Epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of esophageal perforations: systematic review.

E Ilias K Sdralis1,2, S Petousis2, F Rashid1, B Lorenzi1, A Charalabopoulos1.   

Abstract

We performed a systematic review of epidemiological, diagnostic, and therapeutic outcomes of esophageal perforations. A systematic review was performed in PubMed database using the key-phrase 'esophageal perforation'. All studies regarding acute esophageal perforations were reviewed and parameters of epidemiology, diagnosis, and management published in the literature from 2005 up to 2015 were included in the study. Studies of postoperative esophageal leaks were excluded. Two researchers performed individually the research, while quality assessment was performed according to GRADE classification. Main outcomes and exposure were overall mortality, perforation-to-admission interval, anatomical position, cause, prevalent symptom at admission, diagnostic tests used, type of initial management (conservative or surgery), healing rate, and fistula complication. There were 1319 articles retrieved, of which 52 studies including 2,830 cases finally met inclusion criteria. Mean duration of study period was 15.2 years. Mean patient age was 58.4 years. Out of 52 studies included, there were 43 studies of very low or low quality included. The overall mortality rate according to extracted data was 13.3% (n = 214, 1,644 patients, 39 studies). Admission before 24 hours was reported in 58.1% of patients (n = 514). Position was thoracic in 72.6% of patients (n = 813, 1,120 patients, 20 studies). Mean cause of perforation was iatrogenic in 46.5% of patients (n = 899, 1,933 patients, 40 studies). Initial management was conservative in 51.3% of cases (n = 904, 1,762 patients, 41 studies) CT confirmed diagnosis in 38.7% of overall cases in which it was used as imaging diagnostic procedure (n = 266), X-ray in 36.6% (n = 231), and endoscopy in 37.4% (n = 343). Sepsis on admission was observed in 23.3% of cases (209 out of 898 patients, 16 studies). The present systematic review highlighted the significant proportion of cases diagnosed with delay over 24 hours, mortality rates ranging over 10% and no consensus regarding optimal therapeutic approach and optimal diagnostic management. As esophageal perforation represents a high-risk clinical condition without consensus regarding optimal management, there should be large multicenter prospective studies or Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT)s performed in order to advance diagnostic and therapeutic approach of such challenging pathology.
© The Authors 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  epidemiology; esophageal perforation; management; mortality

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28575240     DOI: 10.1093/dote/dox013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Esophagus        ISSN: 1120-8694            Impact factor:   3.429


  11 in total

1.  Caustic ingestion: CT findings of esophageal injuries and thoracic complications.

Authors:  Giuseppe Cutaia; Marianna Messina; Sara Rubino; Elisabetta Reitano; Leonardo Salvaggio; Ilenia Costanza; Francesco Agnello; Ludovico La Grutta; Massimo Midiri; Giuseppe Salvaggio; Rosalia Gargano
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2021-03-08

2.  Endoscopic negative pressure therapy (ENPT) in head and neck surgery: first experiences in treatment of postoperative salivary fistulas and cervical esophageal perforations.

Authors:  Jonathan Loeck; Hans-Jürgen von Lücken; Adrian Münscher; Christian Theodor Müller; Gunnar Loske
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-03-14       Impact factor: 2.503

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

Authors:  Karl-Frederick Karstens; Björn Ole Stüben; Tarik Ghadban; Faik G Uzunoglu; Kai Bachmann; Maximilian Bockhorn; Jakob R Izbicki; Matthias Reeh
Journal:  Esophagus       Date:  2019-11-28       Impact factor: 4.230

Review 4.  Esophageal emergencies: WSES guidelines.

Authors:  Mircea Chirica; Michael D Kelly; Stefano Siboni; Alberto Aiolfi; Carlo Galdino Riva; Emanuele Asti; Davide Ferrari; Ari Leppäniemi; Richard P G Ten Broek; Pierre Yves Brichon; Yoram Kluger; Gustavo Pereira Fraga; Gil Frey; Nelson Adami Andreollo; Federico Coccolini; Cristina Frattini; Ernest E Moore; Osvaldo Chiara; Salomone Di Saverio; Massimo Sartelli; Dieter Weber; Luca Ansaloni; Walter Biffl; Helene Corte; Imtaz Wani; Gianluca Baiocchi; Pierre Cattan; Fausto Catena; Luigi Bonavina
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2019-05-31       Impact factor: 5.469

Review 5.  Endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure (E-Vac) therapy for postoperative esophageal fistula: successful case series and literature review.

Authors:  Carolina Rubicondo; Andrea Lovece; Domenico Pinelli; Amedeo Indriolo; Alessandro Lucianetti; Michele Colledan
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-11-14       Impact factor: 2.754

6.  Current treatment and outcome of esophageal perforation: A single-center experience and a pooled analysis.

Authors:  Yufeng Deng; Luqi Hou; Dianyue Qin; Ting Huang; Tianzhu Yuan
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-04-23       Impact factor: 1.817

7.  Endoluminal vacuum therapy in the management of an esophago-pleural fistula as a complication of Boerhaave syndrome in a patient with eosinophilic esophagitis.

Authors:  Carlos Tuñon; Juan De Lucas; Jan Cubilla; Rafael Andrade; Miguel Aguirre; Julio Zúñiga Cisneros
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-12-20       Impact factor: 3.067

Review 8.  The insidious presentation and challenging management of esophageal perforation following diagnostic and therapeutic interventions.

Authors:  Savvas Lampridis; Sofoklis Mitsos; Martin Hayward; David Lawrence; Nikolaos Panagiotopoulos
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 3.005

9.  Boerhaave syndrome.

Authors:  Fatt Yang Chew; Su-Tso Yang
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2021-09-27       Impact factor: 8.262

10. 

Authors:  Fatt Yang Chew; Su-Tso Yang
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 8.262

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.