Journal Article

Impact of Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy with Low Negative Pressure for Esophageal Perforations and Postoperative Anastomotic Esophageal Leaks

Müller-Dornieden, Annegret, Kunsch, Steffen, Gaedcke, Jochen, Jung, Carlo Felix Maria, Seif Amir Hosseini, Ali, Ghadimi, Michael, Wedi, Edris, Ellenrieder, Volker, Biggemann, Lorenz, Gromski, Mark A.

2021

Overview

Introduction: Management of esophageal anastomotic leaks (AL) and esophageal perforations (EP) remains difficult and often requires an interdisciplinary treatment modality. For primary endoscopic management, self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) placement is often considered first-line therapy. Recently, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has emerged as an alternative or adjunct for management of these conditions. So far, data for EVT in the upper gastrointestinal-tract is restricted to single centre, non-randomized trials. No studies on optimal negative pressure application during EVT exist. The aim of our study is to describe our centre’s experience with low negative pressure (LNP) EVT for these indications over the past 5-years. Patients and Methods: Between January 2014 and December 2018, 30 patients were endoscopically treated for AL (n = 23) or EP (n = 7). All patients were primarily treated with EVT and LNP between –20 and –50 mm Hg. Additional endoscopic treatment was added when EVT failed. Procedural and peri-procedural data, as well as clinical outcomes including morbidity and mortality, were analysed. Results: Clinical successful endoscopic treatment of EP and AL was achieved in 83.3% (n = 25/30), with 73.3% success using EVT alone (n = 22/30). Mean treatment duration until leak closure was 16.1 days (range 2–58 days). Additional treatment modalities for complete leak resolution was necessary in 10% (n = 3/30), including SEMS placement and fibrin glue injection. Mean hospital stay for patients with EP was shorter with 33.7 days compared to AL with 54.4 days (p = 0.08). Estimated preoperative 10-year overall survival (Charlson comorbidity score) was 39.4% in patients with AL and 59.9% in patients with EP (p = 0.26). A mean of 5.1 EVT changes (range 1–12) was needed in EP and 3.6 changes (range 1–13) in AL to achieve complete closure, switch to other treatment modality, or reach endoscopic failure (p = 0.38). Conclusion: LNP EVT enables effective minimally – invasive endoluminal leak closure from anastomotic esophageal leaks and EP in high-morbid patients. In this study, EVT was combined with other endoscopic treatment options such as SEMS placement or fibrin glue injection in order to achieve leak or perforation closure in the vast majority of patients (83.3%). Low aspiration pressures led to slower but still sufficient clinical results.

• Subject: Research Article