Endoscopic treatment in pediatric patients with recurrent and H-type tracheoesophageal fistulas - A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic treatments for managing recurrent tracheoesophageal fistula (rTEF) and H-type TEF are being utilized lately; however, the preferred technique is yet to be determined. We aimed to systematically review existing publications on endoscopic treatment of rTEF and H-type TEF to analyze their success and complication rates.

METHODS

PRISMA guidelines were followed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were comprehensively searched in accordance to a priori developed protocol, from 1975 until 2020. English, Spanish and German papers were included. Studies were independently screened and analyzed by two reviewers.

RESULTS

84 full texts were assessed for eligibility out of 581 screened studies, of these, 39 studies with 127 patients were eligible for inclusion (115 rTEF and 12 H-type TEF). All included studies were cases reports or case series. Overall success rate was 45% with sealant injection, 87% with de-epithelialization and 80% with sealant injection and de-epithelialization combined. The mean number of required treatments for success was 1.9 (range 1-6). Mixed effect model meta-analysis of case series with n > 1 showed that sealant injection had a significantly lower success rate of 50% (95% CI 1-99%, I² 72%) compared to de-epithelialization 90% (95% CI 72-99%, I² 27%), p = 0.007 and the combination of both techniques 87% (95% CI 68-99%, I² 11%), p = 0.02. Nine patients (7%) had transient respiratory distress. No mortalities reported.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic treatment for rTEF and H-type fistula is a minimally invasive technique with favorable outcome and considerably less morbidity compared to open surgery, suggesting it as a safe and effective first line treatment option. Repeated endoscopic treatment attempts can be expected to obtain complete closure. De-epithelization techniques with or without combined tissue adhesive injection had significantly better results than sealant injection techniques alone.