PS02.147: MANAGEMENT OF A SIMULTANEOUS HIGH ESOPHAGO-TRACHEAL FISTULA CAUSED BY ESOPHAGEAL STENT DUE TO ANASTOMOTIC LEAKAGE AFTER IVOR-LEWIS ESOPHAGECTOMY: A CASE REPORT

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 162-162
Author(s):  
Hannah Andrae ◽  
Thomas Musholt ◽  
Hauke Lang ◽  
Peter Grimminger

Abstract Background Esophagotracheal perforation is a very severe complication. However, an esophagotracheal perforation caused due to an esophageal stent after anastomotic leakage after ivor-lewis resection, is even more complex and associated with high mortality. Therefore we present a case how we managed a high esophagotracheal perforation and anastomotic leakage after ivor-lewis resection of esophageal cancer, prior treated with neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. Methods Case report A 71-year old patient was transferred to our center due to an esophagotracheal perforation at the proximal stent—and at 18–20 cm from the front teeth row. The stent had been placed due to anastomotic leakage after ivor-lewis resection. The patient's history began with a squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus, treated with neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and followed by ivor-lewis esophagectomy. She developed an anastomotic leakage, which was treated with an esophageal stent. This stent perforated and caused a fistula between the esophagus and the trachea. Results After transfer to our center, we performed a tracheotomia with a tubus blocked, distal of the esophagotracheal fistula, to prevent a respiratory insufficiency. We removed the dislocated stent and induced an endosponge therapy. A prolonged healing process lead to a step-by-step decrease of the anastomotic leakage. Finally, the semicircular hole could be supplied by a fibrin sealant. We resected the fistula via cervical surgery and placed a pectoralis muscle flap between trachea and esophagus. The surgery was performed under steady neuromonitoring control. The postoperative course was uncomplicated. The patient could be extubated with spontaneous breathing. Eleven days after surgery, the patient could be discharged fully enteralised. The stomach interponate could be kept. Half a year later, our patient shows up in our regular consultation, reporting no dysphagia. Conclusion Our experience with endosponge treatment suggests that this is the first choice for successful healing of anastomotic leakage after ivor-lewis resection. A stenting of the esophagus after finding an anastomotic leakage can be considered, but is associated with a risk of further complication. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Evangelos Tagkalos ◽  
Hannah K Andrae ◽  
Thomas J Musholt ◽  
Hauke Lang ◽  
Peter P Grimminger

Abstract Aim We present a case of a 71 year old female with a combined anastomotic leakage after ivor-lewis resection and esophagotracheal perforation. Background & Methods Anastomotic leakage after esophageal resection is still associated with high morbidity and mortality throughout hospitalization. Nowadays there are several methods to accomplish sufficient closure of the anastomotic leakage such as clipping and using fibrin sealant in smaller leakages. Severe insufficiencies are commonly treated using esophageal stents. In our case the use of such a stent (10cm covered) placed to an anastomotic leak following esophagectomy with high intrathoracic anastomosis lead to an esophagotracheal fistula that was treated in a two-step approach. Firstly a tracheotomy was performed and the cuff of the tracheal cannula was blocked below the esophagotracheal fistula to prevent respiratory insufficiency. The stent was removed and an endosponge therapy was induced in order to manage the anastomotic leak. Finally, the semicircular wound could be covered by a fibrin sealant for final closure. In a second step, via open cervical surgery, the esophagotracheal fistula was resected, followed by overstitching of the pars membranacea and the esophagus and interposition of a muscle flap of the left pectoralis major muscle between trachea and esophagus. Results Postoperatively the patient was extubated with spontaneous breathing and the tracheal tube could be removed five days after surgery. After four days, the patient started drinking and enteral nutrition could be increased with a constant sufficiency of the gastric interponate. A postoperative contrast swallow at day 11 showed no leak and a good emptying of the gastric conduit. The control of the recurrent laryngeal nerves showed no abnormalities. Conclusion Our experience with endosponge treatment suggests that this is the first choice for successful healing of anastomotic leakage after ivor-lewis resection, especially in patients with a low BMI, to prevent esophageal stent perforations. Furthermore, the combination of an esophagotracheal fistula and an anastomotic leak does not have to result in a cervical outlet and removal of the gastric conduit. Patients should be delivered to specialized upper GI surgical centers, which have a high standard of complex esophageal surgery and endoscopic intervention possibilities.


2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomas Harustiak ◽  
Jiri Tvrdon ◽  
Alexandr Pazdro ◽  
Martin Snajdauf ◽  
Hana Faltova ◽  
...  

Abstract   Anastomotic leak (AL) and conduit necrosis (CN) are among the most serious surgical complications after esophageal resection. Endoscopic, radiological and surgical methods are used in their treatment. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the results of the treatment of acute anastomotic complications after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in a single high-volume center. Methods We performed a retrospective audit of a consecutive cohort of 815 patients undergoing transthoracic esophagectomy with intrathoracic esophago-gastric anastomosis from 2005 to 2019. AL was graded according to Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group recommendation. Results There were 79 patients with AL and 6 patients with CN (10%). AL type I, II and III was diagnosed in 33 (39%), 25 (29%) and 27 (32%) patients, respectively. Esophageal stent was used in 40 patients. Primary surgical revision (with/without stent insertion) was performed in 14 patients. Reoperation was necessary overall in 25 patients (29%). Seventeen patients (20%) ended-up with esophageal diversion. Treatment with esophageal stent was successful in 28/40 patients (70%). Endoscopic vacuum-therapy was successfully used in three patients for peristent leak after stent extraction. Mortality of severe AL (type II and III) was 10/52 patients (19%). Conclusion Successful management of acute anastomotic complications requires early diagnosis and an individual treatment approach with the use of endoscopic, radiological and surgical methods. The primary attempt for anastomosis preservation using esophageal stent is desirable. Considering the clinical condition and CT finding, we recommend not to hesitate with surgical revision with debridement and drainage of pleural cavity and mediastinum. If primary therapy fails, life-saving procedure is the esophageal diversion.


2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Berend Van Der Wilk ◽  
Eliza R C Hagens ◽  
Ben M Eyck ◽  
Suzanne S Gisbertz ◽  
Richard Hillegersberg ◽  
...  

Abstract   To compare complications following totally minimally invasive (TMIE), laparoscopically assisted (hybrid) and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer. Three randomized trials have reported benefits for minimally invasive esophagectomy. Two studies compared TMIE versus open esophagectomy and another compared hybrid versus open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Only small retrospective studies compared TMIE with hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Methods Data were used from the International Esodata Study Group assessing patients undergoing TMIE, hybrid or open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Primary outcome was pneumonia, secondary outcomes included incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage, (major) complications, length of stay, escalation of care and 90-day mortality. Data were analyzed using multivariate multilevel models. Results In total, 4733 patients were included in this study (TMIE:1472, hybrid:1364 and open:1897). Patients undergoing TMIE had lower incidence of pneumonia compared to hybrid (10.9% vs 16.3%, Odds Ratio (OR):0.56, 95%CI: 0.40–0.80) and open esophagectomy (10.9% vs 17.4%, OR:0.60, 95%CI: 0.42–0.84) and had shorter length of stay (median 10 days (IQR 8–16)) compared to hybrid (14 (11–19), p = 0.041) and open esophagectomy (11 (9–16), p = 0.027). Patients undergoing TMIE had higher rate of anastomotic leakage compared to hybrid (15.1% vs 10.7%, OR:1.47, 95%CI: 1.01–2.13) and open esophagectomy (7.3%, OR:1.73, 95%CI: 1.26–2.38). No differences were reported between hybrid and open esophagectomy. Conclusion Compared to hybrid and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, TMIE resulted in a lower pneumonia rate, a shorter hospital length of stay but a higher anastomotic leakage rate. The impact of these individual complications on survival and long-term quality of life should be further investigated.


Author(s):  
Benjamin Babic ◽  
Lars Mortimer Schiffmann ◽  
Hans Friedrich Fuchs ◽  
Dolores Thea Mueller ◽  
Thomas Schmidt ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Esophagectomy is the gold standard in the surgical therapy of esophageal cancer. It is either performed thoracoabdominal with a intrathoracic anastomosis or in proximal cancers with a three-incision esophagectomy and cervical reconstruction. Delayed gastric conduit emptying (DGCE) is the most common functional postoperative disorder after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (IL). Pneumonia is significantly more often in patients with DGCE. It remains unclear if DGCE anastomotic leakage (AL) is associated. Aim of our study is to analyze, if AL is more likely to happen in patients with a DGCE. Patients and methods 816 patients were included. All patients have had an IL due to esophageal/esophagogastric-junction cancer between 2013 and 2018 in our center. Intrathoracic esophagogastric end-to-side anastomosis was performed with a circular stapling device. The collective has been divided in two groups depending on the occurrence of DGCE. The diagnosis DGCE was determined by clinical and radiologic criteria in accordance with current international expert consensus. Results 27.7% of all patients suffered from DGCE postoperatively. Female patients had a significantly higher chance to suffer from DGCE than male patients (34.4% vs. 26.2% vs., p = 0.040). Pneumonia was more common in patients with DGCE (13.7% vs. 8.5%, p = 0.025), furthermore hospitalization was longer in DGCE patients (median 17 days vs. 14d, p < 0.001). There was no difference in the rate of type II anastomotic leakage, (5.8% in both groups DGCE). All patients with ECCG type II AL (n = 47; 5.8%) were treated successfully by endoluminal/endoscopic therapy. The subgroup analysis showed that ASA ≥ III (7.6% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.05) and the histology squamous cell carcinoma (9.8% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.01) were independent risk factors for the occurrence of an AL. Conclusion Our study confirms that DGCE after IL is a common finding in a standardized collective of patients in a high-volume center. This functional disorder is associated with a higher rate of pneumonia and a prolonged hospital stay. Still, there is no association between DGCE and the occurrence of an AL after esophagectomy. The hypothesis, that an DGCE results in a higher pressure on the anastomosis and therefore to an AL in consequence, can be refuted. DGCE is not a pathogenetic factor for an AL.


CHEST Journal ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 145 (3) ◽  
pp. 38A
Author(s):  
Eric Toloza ◽  
Lindsey Bendure ◽  
Christian Sobky ◽  
Joseph Garrett ◽  
Nasreen Vohra ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Vito Mandarino ◽  
Giuliano Francesco Bonura ◽  
Dario Esposito ◽  
Riccardo Rosati ◽  
Paolo Parise ◽  
...  

Abstract The treatment of anastomotic post-esophagectomy leaks and fistula is challenging. Endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure (EVAC) is an emerging technique that employs negative pressure wound therapy to treat anastomotic leaks endoscopically. Esosponge is specifically designed for esophageal EVAC therapy. We report on a 49-year-old woman who underwent a totally mini-invasive Ivor–Lewis esophagectomy and developed a giant postoperative leak with a complex pleural collection, but she was not fit for surgical re-intervention. The patient healed almost completely after 14 exchange sessions of Esosponge over 35 days.


2016 ◽  
Vol 102 (1) ◽  
pp. 247-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas Goense ◽  
Peter S.N. van Rossum ◽  
Teus J. Weijs ◽  
Marc J. van Det ◽  
Grard A. Nieuwenhuijzen ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 99 (10) ◽  

Introduction: Anastomotic leak (AL) is one of the most serious surgical complications after esophagectomy. Endoscopic, radiological and surgical methods are used in the treatment of AL. The aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate our therapeutic procedures and results of AL treatment after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (ILE). Methods: Retrospective audit of all ILEs performed in the years 2005−2019. Evaluation of AL treatment results according to Esophagectomy Complication Consensus Group (ECCG) classification and according to the primary therapeutic procedure with a focus on the treatment with esophageal stent. Results: Out of 817 patients with ILE, AL was detected in 80 patients (9.8%): ECCG type I 33 (41%), type II 23 (29%) and type III 24 (30%) patients. Some 33 patients (41%) were treated conservatively. Esophageal stents were used in 39 patients (49%), of which 18 (23%) had concomitant percutaneous drainage and 17 (21%) were reoperated. Reoperation without a stent insertion was performed in 7 patients (9%). Esophageal diversion with cervical esophagostomy was performed in a total of 16 patients (20%). Esophageal stent treatment was successful in 24/39 patients (62%). Airway fistula occurred in 4 patients treated with stent (10%). Endoscopic vacuum therapy was successfully used in three patients after stent failure. Eight patients (10%) died as a result of AL. Mortality of AL type I, II and III was 0%, 4% and 29%. Conclusion: Successful treatment of AL requires an individual and multidisciplinary approach. The primary effort should aim to preserve anastomosis using endoscopic and radiological methods. In case of insufficient clinical effect, we recommend not to hesitate with reoperation. If primary therapy fails, the life-saving procedure is a cervical esophagostomy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document