Esophageal perforation: diagnosis, management and decision-making – a retrospective tertiary centre study

Objective: Perforation of the esophagus is an extremely rare but life-threatening emergency associated with a high morbidity and mortality. Therefore, time-management is of utmost importance and it is crucial to have an algorithm for diagnostic methods and the subsequent decision-making process.

Material and Methods: All patients who were diagnosed with an esophageal perforation between 2010 and 2020 at our university hospital were ret- rospectively analysed. In addition to patient demographics, the diagnostic method, treatment strategy, defect size and location, etiology and mortality were recorded.

Results: A total of 27 patients were identified with an esophageal perforation. All patients were diagnosed through a computed tomography initiat- ing the treatment algorithm 18 patients underwent conservative/endoscopic treatment, while 9 patients received primary surgery for event-related complications. The overall mortality rate was 25.9%, 11.1% within the endoscopic group and 55% within the surgical group.

Conclusion: A timely diagnosis in cases of an esophageal perforation is of utmost importance. Therefore, every patient should undergo an emergency computed tomography (CT) with oral and intravenous contrast followed by an upper endoscopy if event-related complications are ruled out in the CT.

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

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.

Conservative Management of an Iatrogenic Esophageal Tear in Kenya

Since its description over 250 years ago, diagnosis of esophageal perforation remains challenging, its management controversial, and its mortality high. This rare, devastating, mostly iatrogenic, condition can quickly lead to severe complications and death due to an overwhelming inflammatory response to gastric contents in the mediastinum. Diagnosis is made with the help of esophagograms and although such tears have traditionally been managed via aggressive surgical approach, recent reports emphasize a shift in favor of nonoperative care which unfortunately remains controversial. We here present a case of an iatrogenic esophageal tear resulting from a routine esophagoscopy in a 50-year-old lady presenting with dysphagia. The esophageal tear, almost missed, was eventually successfully managed conservatively, thanks to a relatively early diagnosis.

Are paediatric operations evidence based? A prospective analysis of general surgery practice in a teaching paediatric hospital

BACKGROUND/AIM

Paediatric surgical practice should be based upon solid scientific evidence. A study in 1998 (Baraldini et al., Pediatr Surg Int) indicated that only a quarter of paediatric operations were supported by the then gold standard of evidence based medicine (EBM) which was defined by randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The aim of the current study was to re-evaluate paediatric surgical practice 16 years after the previous study in a larger cohort of patients.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was performed in a tertiary level teaching hospital for children. The study was approved by the local research ethics board. All diagnostic and therapeutic procedures requiring a general anaesthetic carried out over a 4-week period (24 Feb 2014-22 Mar 2014) under the general surgery service or involving a general paediatric surgeon were included in the study. Pubmed and EMBASE were used to search in the literature for the highest level of evidence supporting the recorded procedures. Evidence was classified according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (OCEBM) 2009 system as well as according to the classification used by Baraldini et al. Results was compared using Χ (2) test. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

During the study period, 126 operations (36 different types) were performed on 118 patients. According to the OCEBM classification, 62 procedures (49 %) were supported by systematic reviews of multiple homogeneous RCTs (level 1a), 13 (10 %) by individual RCTs (level 1b), 5 (4 %) by systematic reviews of cohort studies (level 2a), 11 (9 %) by individual cohort studies, 1 (1 %) by systematic review of case-control studies (level 3a), 14 (11 %) by case-control studies (level 3b), 9 (7 %) by case series (type 4) and 11 procedures (9 %) were based on expert opinion or deemed self-evident interventions (type 5). High level of evidence (OCEBM level 1a or 1b or level I according to Baraldini et al. PSI 1998) supported 75 (60 %) operations in the current study compared to 18 (26 %) in the study of 1998 (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The present study shows that nowadays a remarkable number of paediatric surgical procedures are supported by high level of evidence. Despite this improvement in evidence-based paediatric surgical practice, more than a third of the procedures still lack sufficient evidence-based literature support. More RCTs are warranted to support and direct paediatric surgery practice according to the principals of EBM.