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

Best Practices in Esophageal, Gastroduodenal, and Colonic Stenting

Endoscopic stenting is an area of endoscopy that has witnessed noteworthy advancements over the last decade, resulting in evolving clinical practices among gastroenterologists around the world. Indications for endoscopic stenting have progressively expanded, becoming a frequent part of the management algorithm for various benign and malignant conditions of the gastrointestinal tract, from esophagus to rectum. In addition to expanded indications, continuous technological enhancements and development of novel endoscopic stents have resulted in an increased success of these approaches and, in some cases, allowed new applications. This review aimed to summarize best practices in esophageal, gastroduodenal, and colonic stenting.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for the management of upper GI leaks and perforations: a multicenter retrospective study of factors associated with treatment failure (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The optimal management of upper GI (UGI) leaks and perforations remains controversial. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) is a new alternative endoscopic treatment that has recently shown a high rate of successful closure of UGI leaks and perforations. However, only few reports have been made on the factors that affect clinical success rates.

METHODS

Four referral hospitals participated in this retrospective multicenter study. Between September 2015 and February 2020, 119 patients who underwent EVT for a UGI perforation or leak were included. We retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of EVT and the factors associated with EVT failure. Neoadjuvant treatments included chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy before surgery, and the intraluminal method meant that the sponge was placed directly onto the defect within the lumen of UGI tract.

RESULTS

Among 119 patients, 84 showed clinical success (70.6%). Eighty-nine patients (74.8%) underwent EVT as primary therapy and 30 patients as rescue therapy. On multivariate analysis, neoadjuvant treatment and the intraluminal method were significant independent risk factors for EVT failure. During the follow-up period (median, 8.46 months), stenosis occurred in 22 patients (18.5%). The overall survival rate of the EVT success group was significantly higher than that of the EVT failure group. Twenty-two patients died because of non-EVT-related causes, and 7 patients died because of leakage-related adverse events. No death was caused by the EVT itself.

CONCLUSIONS

EVT is a promising treatment method for UGI leaks and perforations. Further studies are needed to establish the indications for successful EVT.

[Technical features of esophageal stent deployment]

OBJECTIVE

To work out the optimal technique of endoscopic stenting of the esophagus (ESE) using various delivery devices (DD); to analyze immediate and long-term results of stenting depending on the type of DD.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

ESE results were studied in 83 patients. Group 1 included 41 patients with implantation of metal stents delivered on a knitted tubular casing (21 stents with proximal opening and 20 stents with distal opening). Group 2 consisted of 42 patients who underwent ESE using a DD in the form of a contracting outer shell.

RESULTS

In the 1^st group, DD «stumbling» in 6 cases (14.6%) required additional tubular hollow rigid conductor. In the 2^nd group, there was no need for additional conductor (p=0.011). Intraoperative stent repositioning after its initial installation was required in 7 cases (17.1%) of the 1^st group and 16 cases (38.1%) of the 2^nd group (p=0.033). Higher likelihood of stent repositioning was observed in distal stent opening. Technical success rate was 100% in both groups. Clinical success rate was 100% in the 1^st group and 97.6% in the 2^nd group (p>0.05). Incidence of early and long-term postoperative complications was similar (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

ESE with various DDs is safe and effective in patients with malignant unresectable esophageal tumors and symptoms of dysphagia. However, certain features of stent installation should be considered. In our opinion, DD with proximal disclosure is more convenient due to better visual positioning of stent.

Endoscopic management of anastomotic leak after esophageal or gastric resection for malignancy: a multicenter experience

BACKGROUND

Most anastomotic leaks after surgical resection for esophageal or esophagogastric junction malignancies are treated endoscopically with esophageal stents. Internal drainage by double pigtail stents has been used for the endoscopic management of leaks following bariatric surgery, and recently introduced for anastomotic leaks after resections for malignancies. Our aim was to assess the overall efficacy of the endoscopic treatment for anastomotic leaks after esophageal or gastric resection for malignancies.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective study in four digestive endoscopy tertiary referral centers in France. We included consecutive patients managed endoscopically for anastomotic leak following esophagectomy or gastrectomy for malignancies between January 2016 and December 2018. The primary outcome was the efficacy of the endoscopic management on leak closure.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients were included, among which 46 men and 22 women, with a mean ± SD age of 61 ± 11 years. Forty-four percent had an Ivor Lewis procedure, 16% a tri-incisional esophagectomy, and 40% a total gastrectomy. The median time between surgery and the diagnosis of leak was 9 (6-13) days. Endoscopic treatment was successful in 90% of the patients. The efficacy of internal drainage and esophageal stents was 95% and 77%, respectively (p = 0.06). The mortality rate was 3%. The only predictive factor of successful endoscopic treatment was the initial use of internal drainage (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic management of early postoperative leak is successful in 90% of patients, preventing highly morbid surgical revisions. Internal endoscopic drainage should be considered as the first-line endoscopic treatment of anastomotic fistulas whenever technically feasible.

Self-expanding Metal Stents for Anastomotic Leaks After Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a common and severe complication after upper gastrointestinal (UGI) surgery. Although evidence is scarce, endoscopic deployed self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are well-established for the management of AL in UGI surgery. The present study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, effectiveness, and safety of SEMS in terms of success, mortality, and morbidity in patients with AL after UGI cancer surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with AL after primary UGI cancer surgery were retrospectively analyzed with regard to demographics, disease, surgical and endoscopic procedures, and complications. Stent treatment success was divided into technical, primary (within 72 hours of stent deployment), sustained (after 72 hours of stent deployment), and sealing success.

RESULTS

In a total of 63 patients, 74 stents were used and 11 were deployed in endoscopic reinterventions. Stent deployment was successful in all patients. Primary and sustained success rates were 68.3% (n = 43) and 65.1% (n = 41), respectively. Of the primarily successfully treated patients, 87.8% remained successfully treated. If primary treatment was unsuccessful, it remained unsuccessful in 66.6% of the patients (P = 0.002). Final sealing of the leakage was observed in 65.1% of patients (n = 41). Longer stent shafts and wider stent end widths were correlated with successful stent treatment (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

SEMS are a safe and sufficient tool in the treatment of AL after UGI cancer surgery. Treatment success is improved with longer stent shafts and wider stent end widths. Switching to alternative treatments is strongly suggested if signs of persistent leakage are present beyond 72 hours after stent placement, as this is highly indicative of sustained stent failure.

Esophageal stenting for benign and malignant disease: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2021

MALIGNANT DISEASE

1: ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) for palliation of malignant dysphagia over laser therapy, photodynamic therapy, and esophageal bypass.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 2 : ESGE recommends brachytherapy as a valid alternative, alone or in addition to stenting, in esophageal cancer patients with malignant dysphagia and expected longer life expectancy.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends esophageal SEMS placement for sealing malignant tracheoesophageal or bronchoesophageal fistulas. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 : ESGE does not recommend SEMS placement as a bridge to surgery or before preoperative chemoradiotherapy because it is associated with a high incidence of adverse events. Other options such as feeding tube placement are preferable. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

BENIGN DISEASE

5: ESGE recommends against the use of SEMSs as first-line therapy for the management of benign esophageal strictures because of the potential for adverse events, the availability of alternative therapies, and their cost. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE suggests consideration of temporary placement of self-expandable stents for refractory benign esophageal strictures. Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE suggests that fully covered SEMSs be preferred over partially covered SEMSs for the treatment of refractory benign esophageal strictures because of their very low risk of embedment and ease of removability. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends the stent-in-stent technique to remove partially covered SEMSs that are embedded in the esophageal wall. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends that temporary stent placement can be considered for the treatment of leaks, fistulas, and perforations. No specific type of stent can be recommended, and the duration of stenting should be individualized. Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends considering placement of a fully covered large-diameter SEMS for the treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding refractory to medical, endoscopic, and/or radiological therapy, or as initial therapy for patients with massive bleeding. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.

Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy in Patients with Transmural Defects of the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

A transmural defect of the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract is a life-threatening condition associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recently, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) was used for managing UGI defects and showed promising results. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize evidence on the efficacy of EVT in patients with transmural defects of the UGI tract. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for publications on the effect of EVT on successful closure, mortality, complications, and post-EVT strictures. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. This meta-analysis included 29 studies involving 498 participants. The pooled estimate rate of successful closure with EVT was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81-0.88). The pooled estimate rates for mortality, complications, and post-EVT strictures were 0.11, 0.10, and 0.14, respectively. According to the etiology of the transmural defect (perforation vs. leak and fistula), no significant difference was observed in successful closure (odds ratio [OR]: 1.45, 95% CI: 0.45-4.67, p = 0.53), mortality (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.24-2.46, p = 0.66), complications (OR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.17-5.15, p = 0.94), or post-EVT stricture rates (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.12-4.24, p = 0.70). The successful closure rate was significantly higher with EVT than with self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement (OR: 3.14, 95% CI: 1.23-7.98, p = 0.02). EVT is an effective and safe treatment for leaks and fistulae, as well as for perforations in the UGI. Moreover, EVT seems to be a better treatment option than SEMS placement for UGI defects.

Outcomes of Esophageal Stent Therapy for the Management of Anastomotic Leaks

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to present the optimal patient selection for esophageal stenting after esophageal resection to investigate possible factors leading to treatment success or treatment failure in these patients.

METHODS

This was a prospective, observational study of patients from January 2005 to May 2019 with an esophageal anastomotic leak that were treated with a self-expandable stent (SES).

RESULTS

A total of 34 patients were treated. All achieved technical success (100%); 33 (97%) achieved clinical success. No patient had to have reoperative surgery based on their leak management. The stenting in-hospital mortality was 0% with 1 patient (2%) with a 90-day mortality from possible leak-related death. Patients had their stents removed with a median of 106 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Stenting for an anastomotic leak after resection offers a safe and effective method of treatment and is successful in the majority of cases. Critical to success is optimal patient selection, adequate leak drainage, and optimal stent selection and placement.

Endoscopic treatment of postoperative esophagogastric leaks with fully covered self-expanding metal stents

BACKGROUND

the management of postoperative esophageal leaks is a huge therapeutic challenge. Thanks to the advances in endoscopy, treatment with esophageal stents has been proposed as a valid option.

AIMS

the main objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the use of fully covered esophageal metal stents in the treatment of postoperative esophageal leaks.

METHODS

a retrospective observational study was performed in patients with postoperative esophageal leaks, treated with fully covered self-expandable metal stents between June 2011 and May 2018.

RESULTS

twenty-five patients were evaluated and 34 stents were placed. The closure of the leak was observed in 21 patients after removal of the stent, with an overall technical success rate of 84 %. The mean time with a stent placed for closure of the fistula was 55.7 ± 27.11 days/patient (mean of 39 ± 24.30 days/stent). The most frequent complication was a partial distal stent migration (7/34 stents), followed by five cases of complete migration into the stomach.

CONCLUSIONS

endoscopic treatment with fully covered self-expandable metal stents seems to be an effective and safe first-line treatment for postoperative esophageal leaks, according to the experience in our center.

Diagnosis and management of iatrogenic endoscopic perforations: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement - Update 2020

1:  ESGE recommends that each center implements a written policy regarding the management of iatrogenic perforations, including the definition of procedures that carry a higher risk of this complication. This policy should be shared with the radiologists and surgeons at each center. 2 : ESGE recommends that in the case of an endoscopically identified perforation, the endoscopist reports its size and location, with an image, and statement of the endoscopic treatment that has been applied. 3:  ESGE recommends that symptoms or signs suggestive of iatrogenic perforation after an endoscopic procedure should be rapidly and carefully evaluated and documented with a computed tomography (CT) scan. 4 : ESGE recommends that endoscopic closure should be considered depending on the type of the iatrogenic perforation, its size, and the endoscopist expertise available at the center. Switch to carbon dioxide (CO2) endoscopic insufflation, diversion of digestive luminal content, and decompression of tension pneumoperitoneum or pneumothorax should also be performed. 5 : ESGE recommends that after endoscopic closure of an iatrogenic perforation, further management should be based on the estimated success of the endoscopic closure and on the general clinical condition of the patient. In the case of no or failed endoscopic closure of an iatrogenic perforation, and in patients whose clinical condition is deteriorating, hospitalization and surgical consultation are recommended.

Comparison of endoscopic vacuum therapy versus endoscopic stenting for esophageal leaks: systematic review and meta-analysis

Esophageal leaks remain a life-threatening postoperative complication of esophagectomy. Currently, self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) represent the endoscopic mainstay of treatment. Recently, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has emerged and shown promising results in these patients. We conducted an electronic systematic search using MEDLINE databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science) looking for studies comparing EVT and SEMS for the treatment of esophageal leak and/or perforation. Four studies including 163 patients matched the inclusion criteria. Esophageal leak closure rate is significantly higher with EVT than SEMS [pooled odds ratio 5.51 (95% CI 2.11-14.88; P < 0.001)]. Additionally, EVT has a shorter treatment duration [pooled mean difference -9.0 days (95% CI 16.6-1.4; P = 0.021)], lower major complication (P = 0.011), and in-hospital mortality (P = 0.002) rate compared to SEMS. EVT for esophageal leak is feasible and safe. It has the potential to become the new gold standard in the endoscopic treatment of esophageal leaks and perforations. However, further comparative studies with SEMS are needed to strengthen the current evidence.