The safety of endoscopic esophageal procedures under general anesthesia

Utility of fluoroscopic oesophagography in the setting of spontaneous and blunt traumatic pneumomediastinum

AIM

To determine the incidence of positive fluoroscopic oesophagography in patients presenting with spontaneous or blunt traumatic pneumomediastinum.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective chart review was performed on patients who underwent fluoroscopic oesophagography for spontaneous or blunt traumatic pneumomediastinum between 2001-2019. Patients were excluded for history of oesophageal surgery, penetrating trauma, oesophageal cancer, or tracheal/oesophageal instrumentation.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty-two patients met the inclusion criteria; 170 presented with spontaneous pneumomediastinum and 82 presented with blunt traumatic pneumomediastinum. Fluoroscopic oesophagography was positive in eight patients with spontaneous pneumomediastinum, for a positivity rate of 4.7% (8/170). There was one false-negative case in a patient who presented with spontaneous pneumomediastinum and was found to have a non-full-thickness oesophageal injury on endoscopy. Fluoroscopic oesophagography was negative in all patients with blunt traumatic pneumomediastinum (0/82). The sensitivity and specificity of fluoroscopic oesophagography were 88.9% (8/9) and 100% (243/243), respectively. Oesophageal injury was more common in patients with spontaneous pneumomediastinum and a pleural effusion (5/11, 45.4%) than in patients with spontaneous pneumomediastinum and no pleural effusion (4/159, 2.5%, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The present findings do not support routine oesophagography in patients with blunt traumatic pneumomediastinum. Conversely, a positivity rate of 4.7% in patients with spontaneous pneumomediastinum suggests oesophagography may be warranted in this population, particularly if an associated pleural effusion is present.

Anesthetic Consideration for Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy

A recent achalasia guideline suggests that peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a safe option for achalasia that is as effective as Heller myotomy. It is recommended that POEM should be performed under general anesthesia. The incidence of adverse events such as bleeding, perforation, and carbon dioxide insufflation-related complications was lower in POEM under endotracheal general anesthesia than in POEM under sedation. Subcutaneous emphysema, pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, pneumoperitoneum, and accompanying hemodynamic instability can be caused by carbon dioxide insufflation. Treatment of possible physiological changes and adverse events during the POEM procedure from the point of view of anesthesiologists may give endoscopists a new perspective on improving patient safety. The territory of therapeutic endoscopy can be expanded through cooperation with other departments, including anesthesia services. Efforts to understand different perspectives will certainly help not only secure patient safety but also expand the area of treatment.