Treatment of anastomotic leaks with metallic stent after esophagectomies

Understanding Post-Esophagectomy Complications and Their Management: The Early Complications

Esophagectomy is a technically complex operation performed for both benign and malignant esophageal disease. Medical and surgical advancements have led to improved outcomes in esophagectomy patients over the past several decades; however, surgeons must remain vigilant as complications happen often and can be severe. Post-esophagectomy complications can be grouped into early and late categories. The aim of this review is to discuss the early complications of esophagectomy along with their risk factors, work-up, and management strategies with special attention given to anastomotic leaks.

The Use of Esophageal Stents in the Management of Postoperative Fistulas-Current Status, Clinical Outcomes and Perspectives-Review

Esophageal fistula remains one of the main postoperative complications, with the treatment often requiring the use of stents. This article reviews the updates on the use of endoscopic stents for the treatment of postoperative esophageal leakage in terms of indications, types of stents used, efficiency, specific complications and perspectives.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched the PubMed and MEDLINE databases for the keywords postoperative esophageal anastomotic leak and postoperative esophageal anastomotic leak stent, and retrieved relevant papers published until December 2022.

RESULTS

The endoscopic discovery of the fistula is usually followed by the insertion of a fully covered esophageal stent. It has an efficiency of more than 60% in closing the fistula, and the failure is related to the delayed application of the method, a situation more suitable for endo vac therapy. The most common complication is migration, but life-threatening complications have also been described. The combination of the advantages of endoscopic stents and vacuum therapy is probably found in the emerging VACstent procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the competing approaches give promising results, this method has a well-defined place in the treatment of esophageal fistulas, and it is probably necessary to refine the indications for each individual procedure.

Is Prophylactic Cervical Drainage Effective in Patients Undergoing McKeown Esophagectomy Reconstructed Through the Retrosternal Route with Two-Field Lymphadenectomy?

BACKGROUND

McKeown esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy is the treatment of choice for oncologic esophagectomy. A cervical drain is placed in cases after modern two-field lymph node dissection (M2FD) to provide information on anastomotic leakage. However, the necessity of prophylactic cervical drainage during surgery remains unknown. This study aimed to clarify the clinical significance of cervical drainage in patients who underwent McKeown esophagectomy with M2FD.

METHODS

A total of 293 patients underwent McKeown surgery with two-field lymphadenectomy at our institute between January 2013 and December 2019. We compared the day of drain removal, amount of drainage volume, and the appearance of drainage fluid between patients with and without anastomotic leakage.

RESULTS

McKeown esophagectomy reconstructed through the retrosternal route is 203 patients (69.3%) of all. Nineteen patients (6.5%) experienced anastomotic leakage. The amount of cervical drain discharge was comparable between patients with and without anastomotic leakage. In addition, no purulent or salivary discharge was observed in patients with anastomotic leakage. There was no difference in the median day of drain removal between the groups. The initial clinical findings for the diagnosis of anastomotic leakage were surgical site infection in 10 (52.6%), fever in 5 (26.3%), prolonged inflammation in a blood test in 3 (15.8%), and bloody discharge from the chest tube in 1 (5.3%). There was no mortality due to any cause.

CONCLUSION

A prophylactic cervical drain may not be mandatory in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing McKeown esophagectomy reconstructed through the retrosternal route with two-field lymphadenectomy.

T-drain esophagostomy under thoracoscopy for intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomotic leakage following esophagectomy for esophagogastric junction cancer: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomotic leakage is considered the most severe complication. We successfully performed T-drain esophagostomy under thoracoscopy for intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomotic leakage.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 44-year-old man visited a local hospital because of vomiting during the night. Upon examination, the patient was diagnosed with c-T2N0M0 stage II adenocarcinoma in Barrett's esophagus. We performed laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy and lower esophagectomy and gastric conduit reconstruction using the posterior mediastinal route with intrathoracic anastomosis under thoracoscopy. The patient developed fever, chest pain and dyspnea on postoperative day 5. We diagnosed anastomotic leakage and performed reoperation via thoracoscopy. The perforation, which was approximately 8 mm in length, was found on the back side of the esophagogastric anastomosis. There was no clear finding of necrosis in the gastric tube or the esophagus. After sufficiently deterging the thoracic cavity, a T-drain was inserted through the perforation and fixed. After fistula formation, the T-drain was slowly phased out. The postoperative course was uneventful.

DISCUSSION

It is important to note that early treatment of severe leaks is mandatory to limit related mortality. However, current therapies for treating anastomotic leakage are still inefficient and controversial.

CONCLUSION

T-drain esophagostomy under thoracoscopy for intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomotic leakage could be minimally invasive and effective.

The treatments and postoperative complications of esophageal cancer: a review

Abstract

Esophageal cancer is still one of the most common cancers in the world. We review the appropriate treatments at different stages of esophageal cancer and also analyze the advantages and disadvantages of these treatments. The prognosis and recovery of different treatment regimens are further discussed. In particular, post-operative complications are the major causes of high mortality derived from the esophageal cancer. Therefore, we particularly discuss the main complications resulting in high mortality after surgery of esophageal cancer, and summarize their risk factors and treatment options.

Background

As the common cancer, the complications of esophageal cancer after surgery have been not obtained systematic treatment strategy, focusing on treatment regimens based on the different stages of esophageal cancers.

Methods and overview

This paper systematically summarizes the appropriate treatment strategies for different stages of esophageal cancers, and their advantages and disadvantages. We particularly focus on the postoperative survival rate of patients and postoperative complications, and discuss the causes of high mortality risk factors after surgery. The risk factors of death and corresponding treatment methods are further summarized in this study.

Conclusion

Postoperative complications is the main cause responsible for the hard cure of esophageal cancers. The existing literatures indicate that postoperative anastomotic fistula is one of the most important complications leading to death, while it has not received much attention yet. We suggest that anastomotic fistula should be detected and dealt with early by summarizing these literatures. It is, therefore, necessary to develop a set of methods to predict or check anastomotic fistula in advance.

Endoscope-assisted mediastinal drainage therapy for anastomosis leakage after esophagectomy: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Anastomosis leakage after esophagectomy is a major threat which leads to many subsequent complications even mortality. But current diagnosis and treatment methods are inefficient. This retrospective study aims to evaluate the utilization of endoscope-assisted mediastinal drainage therapy in treatment for anastomosis leakage after esophagectomy.

Methods

Between January 2014 and June 2018, 51 patients were confirmed anastomosis leakage using gastroscopy. Of them, 23 patients were treated with endoscope-assisted mediastinal drainage therapy (drainage group); and the other 28 patients received endoscope-assisted biomedical fibrin glue occlusion (occlusion group). Short-term clinical outcomes were examined. Factors related to length of postoperative hospitalization (LPH) was analyzed.

Results

Endoscope provided highly accurate information on the condition of anastomosis leakage. And there was no evidence that early endoscopy could cause damage to the anastomosis or gastric conduit. One patient from drainage group and two from occlusion group discharged against medical advice. Other 48 patients were completely cured without reoperation or mortality. The median LPH was 32 days in drainage group (range from 17 to 80 days) and 81 days in occlusion group (range from 32 to 190 days), respectively (P<0.05). Linear regression indicated statistically significant correlation between LPH and length from diagnosis to drainage or occlusion (R=0.688, P<0.001).

Conclusions

Endoscope-assisted mediastinal drainage therapy is a satisfactory treatment for anastomosis leakage. Early diagnosis and treatment may facilitate the recovery of anastomosis leakage and reduce LPH.

Outcome of Self-Expanding Metal Stents in the Treatment of Anastomotic Leaks After Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Esophageal anastomotic leakages after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy are severe and life-threatening complications. We analyzed the outcome of using self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in the treatment of postoperative leakage after esophagogastrostomy.

METHODS

Seventy patients with esophageal anastomotic leakage after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer who had received SEMS treatment between January 2006 and December 2015 at our clinic were identified in this retrospective study. The patients were analyzed according to demographic characteristics, risk factors, leakage characteristics, stent characteristics, stent-related complications, sealing success rate and mortality.

RESULTS

Over a 10-year period, 70 patients received SEMS as treatment for postoperative anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy. Technical success of esophageal stenting in anastomotic leakage was achieved in 50 out of 70 cases (71.4%). Sealing success rate was 70% (n = 49) with a median treatment of 28 days (range 7-87). In 20 patients (28.6%), stent-related complications, such as stenosis, dislocation, leakage persistence, perforation or esophagotracheal fistula occurred after the SEMS treatment. Sixty-one patients (87.1%) survived SEMS treatment of esophagogastric anastomotic leakage. Mean follow-up for all patients was 38 months (IQR 10-76), and no significant difference was found in a comparison of the long-term survival rate between patients with successful and unsuccessful SEMS treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of esophageal anastomotic leaks after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with SEMS is effective, safe and technically feasible. Aggressive non-surgical management should be considered when developing a treatment plan for stenting.

Analysis of risk factors and classification of aortic fistula after esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Aortic fistula after esophagectomy is a rare and serious complication. The aims of this study were to describe the causes of and classify the fistulas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2008 and December 2017, a total of 1018 patients underwent esophageal resection, mainly for esophageal cancer; aortic fistula after esophagectomy was diagnosed in four patients. We perform a literature review through a database search for similar cases. Aortic fistulas may be classified into two types based on the site at which they occur in relation to the alimentary tract and area of anastomosis. Type 1 fistula occurs within the area of anastomosis, whereas type 2 fistula occurs above or below the anastomosis. The risk factors and clinical features associated with aortic fistulas are described, and comparison between the two types is made.

RESULTS

Through a literature search, 39 cases were identified, of which 26 cases were classified as type 1, and 13 cases were classified as type 2. Of 13 patients (33.3%) who underwent emergent intervention, seven patients survived. Approximately 76.9% of aortic fistula were related to anastomotic fistula, which was more prevalent in type 1 aortic fistula than in type 2 (92% versus 50%, P = 0.005). There was no statistically significant difference in age, gender, side of thoracotomy, type of anastomosis, the postoperative day the hemorrhage occurred, warning hemorrhage, chest pain, or the outcome between the two types of fistula.

CONCLUSIONS

Anastomotic fistula is the primary cause of type 1 aortic fistula after esophagectomy, and early diagnosis and intervention of aortic fistula can improve prognosis. This classification may be a useful guide in determining the approach for second-stage alimentary tract reconstruction.

Outcomes following the main treatment options in patients with a leaking esophagus: a systematic literature review

Leakage from the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction can be lethal due to uncontrolled contamination of the mediastinum. The most predominant risk factors for the subsequent clinical outcome are the patients' delay as well as the delay of diagnosis. Two major therapeutic concepts have been advocated: either prompt closure of the leakage by insertion of a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) or more traditionally, surgical exploration. The objective of this review is to carefully scrutinize the recent literature and assess the outcomes of these two therapeutic alternatives in the management of iatrogenic perforation-spontaneous esophageal rupture as separated from those with anastomotic leak. A systematic web-based search using PubMed and the Cochrane Library was performed, reviewing literature published between January 2005 and December 2015. Eligible studies included all studies that presented data on the outcome of SEMS or surgical exploration in case of esophageal leak (including >3 patients). Only patients older than 15 years of age by the time of admission were included. Articles in other languages but English were excluded. Treatment failure was defined as a need for change in therapeutic strategy due to uncontrolled sepsis and mediastinitis, which usually meant rescue esophagectomy with end esophagostomy, death occurring as a consequence of the leakage or development of an esophagorespiratory fistula and/or other serious life threatening complications. Accordingly, the corresponding success rate is composed of cases where none of the failures above occurred. Regarding SEMS treatment, 201 articles were found, of which 48 were deemed relevant and of these, 17 articles were further analyzed. As for surgical management, 785 articles were retrieved, of which 82 were considered relevant, and 17 were included in the final analysis. It was not possible to specifically extract detailed clinical outcomes in sufficient numbers, when we tried to separately analyze the data in relation to the cause of the leakage: i.e. iatrogenic perforation-spontaneous esophageal rupture and anastomotic leak. As for SEMS treatment, originally 154 reports focused on iatrogenic perforation, 116 focused on spontaneous ruptures, and only four described the outcome following trauma and foreign body management. Only five studies used a prospective protocol to assess treatment efficacy. Regarding a leaking anastomosis, 80 reports contained information about the outcome after treatment of esophagogastrostomies and 35 reported the clinical course after an esophagojejunostomy. An overall success rate of 88% was reported among the 371 SEMS-treated patients, where adequate data were available, with a reported in hospital mortality amounting to 7.5%. Regarding the surgical exploration strategy, the vast majority of patients had an attempt to repair the defect by direct or enforced suturing. This surgical approach also included procedures such as patching with pleura or with a diaphragmatic flap. The overall reported success rate was 83% (305/368) and the in-hospital mortality was 17% (61/368). The current literature suggests that a SEMS-based therapy can be successfully applied as an alternative therapeutic strategy in esophageal perforation rupture.