Use of temporary esophageal stent in management of perforations after benign esophageal surgery.
ABSTRACT Successful conservative management in 3 patients with catastrophic postoperative esophageal leak after nonresection surgery is presented. In each case, the placement of removable stent played a significant role. First patient had persistent leak after primary repair of intrathoracic esophageal perforation. The second patient underwent a transthoracic redo Collis-Nissen repair and was subsequently found to have a perforation in the midesophagus. The last patient had a history of recurrent hiatal hernia repair with mesh reinforcement of the hiatus. A perforation resulted from mesh eroding into the esophagus. All the patients had endoscopic placement of removable silicone-covered polyester stent under fluoroscopic guidance. Stent placement was successful in all patients allowing immediate resumption of diet. After stent removal, contrast study showed no leak or stricture. Endoscopic stent therapy is an effective option in the management of postoperative esophageal perforation.
- SourceAvailable from: Mari Mino-Kenudson[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Safe esophageal closure remains a challenge in transesophageal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES). Previously described methods, such as suturing devices, clips, or submucosal tunneling, all have weaknesses. In this survival animal series, we demonstrate safe esophageal closure with a prototype retrievable, antimigration stent. Nine Yorkshire swine underwent thoracic NOTES procedures. A double-channel gastroscope equipped with a mucosectomy device was used to create an esophageal mucosal defect. A 5-cm submucosal tunnel was created and the muscular esophageal wall was incised with a needle-knife. Mediastinoscopy and thoracoscopy were performed in all swine; lymphadenectomy was performed in seven swine. A prototype small intestinal submucosal (SurgiSIS(®)) covered stent was deployed over the mucosectomy site and tunnel. Three versions of the prototype stent were developed. Prenecropsy endoscopy confirmed stent location and permitted stent retrieval. Explanted esophagi were sent to pathology. Esophageal stenting was successful in all animals. Stent placement took 15.8 ± 4.8 minuted and no stent migration occurred. Prenecropsy endoscopy revealed proximal ingrowth of esophageal mucosa and erosion with Stent A. Mucosal inflammation and erosion was observed proximally with Stent B. No esophageal erosion or pressure damage from proximal radial forces was seen with Stent C. On necropsy, swine 5 had a 0.5-cm periesophageal abscess. Histology revealed a localized inflammatory lesion at the esophageal exit site in swine 1, 3, and 9. The mucosectomy site was partially healed in three swine and poorly healed in six. All swine thrived clinically, except for a brief period of mild lethargy in swine 9 who improved with short-term antibiotic therapy. The submucosal tunnels were completely healed and no esophageal bleeding or stricture formation was observed. All swine survived 13.8 ± 0.4 days and gained weight in the postoperative period. Esophageal stenting provides safe closure for NOTES thoracic procedures but may impede healing of the mucosectomy site.Surgical Endoscopy 03/2011; 25(3):913-8. · 3.43 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Laparoscopic techniques have led to hiatal procedures being performed with less morbidity but higher failure rates. Biologic mesh (biomesh) has been proposed as an alternative to plastic mesh to achieve durable repairs while minimizing stricturing and erosion. This paper documents the lack of significant dysphagia after the placement of biomesh during hiatal hernia repair. A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent paraesophageal hiatal hernia repairs with and without biomesh was performed. Hernias were diagnosed with esophagogastroscopy and esophageal manometry. Demographic, procedural, and pre- and post-surgery symptom data were recorded. Fifty-six patients underwent biomesh repair while 33 patients underwent non-mesh repairs. The procedure time for mesh repairs was significantly longer (p = 0.004). Hospital stays, resting lower esophageal sphincter pressure, and mean contraction amplitudes were similar between groups. Residual pressure was measured to be significantly higher in patients who had mesh repairs (p = 0.0001). Normal esophageal peristalsis was maintained in both groups. At first follow-up, mesh patients complained of more dysphagia and bloating, but non-mesh patients had more heartburn. At second follow-up, non-mesh patients had more symptom complaints than mesh patients. The addition of biomesh for hiatal hernia repair does not result in significantly increased patient dysphagia rates postoperatively compared with patients who underwent primary repair.Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 07/2011; 15(10):1743-9. · 2.36 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aim of this review was to assess the safety and effectiveness of esophageal stents in the management of benign esophageal perforation and in the management of esophageal anastomotic leaks. Benign esophageal perforation and postoperative esophageal anastomotic leak are often encountered. Endoscopic placement of esophageal stent across the site of leakage might help control the sepsis and reduce the mortality and morbidity. All the published case series reporting the use of metallic and plastic stents in the management of postoperative anastomotic leaks, spontaneous esophageal perforations, and iatrogenic esophageal perforations were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed (1990-2012). Primary outcomes assessed were technical success rates and complete healing rates. Secondary outcomes assessed were stent migration rates, stent perforation rates, duration of hospital stay, time to stent removal, and mortality rates. A pooled analysis was performed and subgroup analysis was performed for plastic versus metallic stents and anastomotic leaks versus perforations separately. A total of 27 case series with 340 patients were included. Technical and clinical success rates of stenting were 91% and 81%, respectively. Stent migration rates were significantly higher with plastic stents than with metallic stents (40/148 vs 13/117 patients, respectively; P = 0.001). Patients with metallic stents had significantly higher incidence of postprocedure strictures (P = 0.006). However, patients with plastic stents needed significantly higher number of reinterventions (P = 0.005). Mean postprocedure hospital stay varied from 8 days to 51 days. There was no significant difference in the primary or secondary outcomes when stenting was performed for anastomotic leaks or perforations. Endoscopic management of esophageal anastomotic leaks and perforations with the use of esophageal stents is technically feasible. It seems to be safe and effective when performed along with mediastinal or pleural drainage. Esophageal stent can, therefore, be considered as a treatment option in the management of patients who present early after esophageal perforation or anastomotic leak with limited mediastinal or pleural contamination.Annals of surgery 02/2014; · 7.90 Impact Factor