Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Gastroenterology 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Esophagogastroduodenoscopy | Research

Endoscopic iatrogenic esophageal perforation and management: a retrospective outcome analysis in the modern era

Authors: Eric M. Montminy, Blake Jones, J. Christie Heller, Augustin Attwell

Published in: BMC Gastroenterology | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Iatrogenic esophageal perforation (IEP) is a severe adverse event (AE) of upper endoscopy procedures (UEPs) associated with morbidity. Management has shifted from surgery to endotherapy with clip closure (CC), self-expanding metal stent (SEMS), and vacuum therapy (VT). Limited analyses measure outcomes during contemporary interventional endoscopy periods.

Methods

IEPs associated with EGD, upper EUS, small bowel enteroscopy (SBE), and ERCP at a 3-hospital academic center from January 2011 to December 2023 were identified retrospectively from a centralized AE database. Additional information was obtained from medical records. Statistical analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel and STATA.

Results

Thirty-two IEPs from 26 EGDs, 4 EUS, 1 SBE, and 1 ERCP were identified. IEPs occurred mostly after dilation (bougie N = 7; balloon, N = 5) or foreign body removal (N = 6). Most IEPs occurred in the lower esophagus (N = 10) or gastroesophageal junction (N = 8). Diagnosis was made at a median 2 h after the injury by endoscopy (N = 14), CT scan (N = 12), esophagram (N = 5), or x-ray (N = 1). Initial treatment included conservative therapy alone (N = 7), CC (N = 3), SEMS (N = 14), SEMS plus CC (N = 3), or surgery (N = 3). Eleven patients required additional treatment including repeat SEMS or adjustment (N = 4) or VT (N = 1). No surgical interventions were required after 2013. The median hospital stay was 3 days. Disposition included discharge to home (N = 25), long-term care facility (N = 2), 4 deaths (12.5% of IEPs), and 1 unknown.

Conclusions

IEPs are rare and occur throughout the esophagus after any UEP. The majority are recognized immediately and managed with endotherapy, or rarely, surgery today. These characteristics likely explain the low mortality in this study.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Swei E, Heller JC, Attwell AR. Adverse Event Fatalities Related to GI Endoscopy. Dig Dis Sci. 2022;67(5):1753–60.CrossRefPubMed Swei E, Heller JC, Attwell AR. Adverse Event Fatalities Related to GI Endoscopy. Dig Dis Sci. 2022;67(5):1753–60.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Forbes N, Coelho-Prabhu N, Al-Haddad MA, et al. Adverse events associated with EUS and EUS-guided procedures. Gastrointest Endosc. 2022;95(1):16-26.e2.CrossRef ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Forbes N, Coelho-Prabhu N, Al-Haddad MA, et al. Adverse events associated with EUS and EUS-guided procedures. Gastrointest Endosc. 2022;95(1):16-26.e2.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Sdralis EK, Petousis S, Rashid F, et al. Epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of esophageal perforations: systemic review. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30(8):1–6.CrossRefPubMed Sdralis EK, Petousis S, Rashid F, et al. Epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of esophageal perforations: systemic review. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30(8):1–6.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Axtell AL, Gaissert HA, Morse CR, et al. Management and outcomes of esophageal perforation. Dis Esophagus. 2022;35(1):doab039.CrossRefPubMed Axtell AL, Gaissert HA, Morse CR, et al. Management and outcomes of esophageal perforation. Dis Esophagus. 2022;35(1):doab039.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Brinster CJ, Singhal S, Lee L, et al. Evolving options in the management of esophageal perforation. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77(4):1475–83.CrossRefPubMed Brinster CJ, Singhal S, Lee L, et al. Evolving options in the management of esophageal perforation. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77(4):1475–83.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Biancari F, D’Andrea V, Paone R, et al. Current treatment and outcome of esophageal perforations in adults: systemic review and meta-analysis of 75 studies. World J Surg. 2013;37(5):1051–9.CrossRefPubMed Biancari F, D’Andrea V, Paone R, et al. Current treatment and outcome of esophageal perforations in adults: systemic review and meta-analysis of 75 studies. World J Surg. 2013;37(5):1051–9.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Abbas G, Schuchert MJ, Pettiford BL, et al. Contemporaneous management of esophageal perforation. Surgery. 2009;146(4):749–55 discussion 755–6.CrossRefPubMed Abbas G, Schuchert MJ, Pettiford BL, et al. Contemporaneous management of esophageal perforation. Surgery. 2009;146(4):749–55 discussion 755–6.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Endoscopic iatrogenic esophageal perforation and management: a retrospective outcome analysis in the modern era
Authors
Eric M. Montminy
Blake Jones
J. Christie Heller
Augustin Attwell
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Gastroenterology / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1471-230X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-023-03004-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

BMC Gastroenterology 1/2023 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine