Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

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.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Surgical Endoscopy
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 7/2018

01-07-2018

Endoscopic perforations: what are the indications for surgery?

Authors: Diane Mege, Laura Beyer-Berjot, Walid Ezzedine, Anderson Loundou, Jean-Charles Grimaud, Marc Barthet, Stéphane Berdah

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 7/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Despite their low occurrence, endoscopic perforations (EPs) are concerning. Some predictive factors have been identified, and EP management is debated, whether non-surgical (medical and/or endoscopic) or surgical. The objective was to elaborate a predictive score for surgical management of EP.

Methods

All the patients addressed for upper and lower EP, except oesophageal EP, were retrospectively included (2004–2015). Demographic data, endoscopic features (indication, location, type), clinical, biological and radiological presentations of EP were reviewed. Management of EP and outcomes were recorded. A predictive score was constructed by multiple linear regression and a cut-off value for surgical management was identified. Additional subgroup analysis was performed according to the location of EP (upper and lower).

Results

Among 41150 endoscopic procedures, 44 patients (22 males, median age = 65 years [22–87]) presenting with EP were included (0.09%). Lower gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy was mostly performed (66%). EP diagnosis was immediate in 73% of the cases (n = 32). Non-surgical management was efficient in 2/3 cases treated medically alone, and 18/20 cases treated by endoscopy. Surgical management was always successful (n = 24/24). In case of peritonitis, surgery was systematically required, whereas easily required in case of delayed diagnostic of EP. The EP score was based on the presence of previous abdominal surgery, lower GI endoscopy and diagnostic endoscopy. A cut-off EP score of 22.8% for surgery was chosen; it was associated with a specificity and sensitivity of 40 and 100%, respectively. When subgroups were analysed according to EP location, the EP score was still based on the presence of previous abdominal surgery and diagnostic endoscopy. The cut-off was 6.3 and 73.3% for upper (specificity: 73%, sensitivity: 100%) and lower (89 and 45%) locations, respectively.

Conclusion

The predictive EP score may avoid inappropriate surgical management, as well as delayed surgery after non-surgical management failure. Forthcoming study should prospectively validate this score.
Literature
1.
Lohsiriwat V (2010) Colonoscopic perforation: incidence, risk factors, management and outcome. World J Gastroenterol 16:425–430CrossRef
2.
Rolanda C, Caetano AC, Dinis-Ribeiro M (2013) Emergencies after endoscopic procedures. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 27:783–798CrossRef
3.
Sagawa T, Kakizaki S, Iizuka H, Onozato Y, Sohara N, Okamura S, Mori M (2012) Analysis of colonoscopic perforations at a local clinic and a tertiary hospital. World J Gastroenterol 18:4898–4904CrossRef
4.
Byeon J-S (2013) Colonic perforation: can we manage it endoscopically? Clin Endosc 46:495–499CrossRef
5.
Abbas G, Schuchert MJ, Pettiford BL, Pennathur A, Landreneau J, Landreneau J, Luketich JD, Landreneau RJ (2009) Contemporaneous management of esophageal perforation. Surgery 146:749–756CrossRef
6.
Vogel SB, Rout WR, Martin TD, Abbitt P (2005) Esophageal perforation in adults: aggressive, conservative treatment lowers morbidity and mortality. Ann Surg 241:1016–1023CrossRef
7.
Iqbal CW, Cullinane DC, Schiller HJ, Sawyer MD, Zietlow SP, Farley D (2008) Surgical management and outcomes of 165 colonoscopic perforations from a single institution. Arch Surg 143:701–707CrossRef
8.
Teoh AYB, Poon CM, Lee JFY, Leong HT, Ng SSM, Sung JJY, Lau JYW (2009) Outcomes and predictors of mortality and stoma formation in surgical management of colonoscopic perforations: a multicentre review. Arch Surg 144:9–13CrossRef
9.
Søreide JA, Viste A (2011) Esophageal perforation: diagnostic work-up and clinical decision-making in the first 24 hours. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 19:66CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Paspatis GA, Dumonceau JM, Barthet M, Meisner S, Repici A, Saunders BP, Vezakis A, Gonzalez JM, Turino SY, Tsiamoulos ZP, Fockens P, Hassan C (2014) Diagnosis and management of iatrogenic endoscopic perforations: position statement from the European Society of Gastrointestinal ENdoscopy (ESGE). Endoscopy 46:1–19
11.
Lüning TH, Keemers-Gels ME, Barendregt WB, Tan A, Rosman C (2007) Colonoscopic perforations: a review of 30,366 patients. Surg Endosc 21:994–997CrossRef
12.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRef
13.
Kobayashi N, Yoshitake N, Hirahara Y, Konishi J, Saito Y, Matsuda T, Ishikawa T, Sekiguchi R, Fujimori T (2012) Matched case-control study comparing endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal tumors. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 27:728–733
14.
Orsoni P, Berdah S, Verrier C, Caamano A, Sastre B, Boutboul R, Grimaud JC, Picaud R (1997) Colonic perforation due to colonoscopy: a retrospective study of 48 cases. Endoscopy 29:160–164CrossRef
15.
Kowalczyk L, Forsmark CE, Ben-David K, Wagh MS, Chauhan S, Collins D, Draganov PV (2011) Algorithm for the management of endoscopic perforations: a quality improvement project. Am J Gastroenterol 106:1022–1027CrossRef
16.
Farley DR, Bannon MP, Zietlow SP, Pemberton JH, Ilstrup DM, Larson DR (1997) Management of colonoscopic perforations. Mayo Clin Proc 72:729–733CrossRef
17.
Cho SB, Lee WS, Joo YE, Kim HR, Park SW, Park CH, Kim HS, Choi SK, Rew JS (2012) Therapeutic options for iatrogenic colon perforation: feasibility of endoscopic clip closure and predictors of the need for early surgery. Surg Endosc 26:473–479CrossRef
18.
Sepesi B, Raymond DP, Peters JH (2010) Esophageal perforation: surgical, endoscopic and medical management strategies. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 26:379–383CrossRef
19.
Magdeburg R, Sold M, Post S, Kaehler G (2013) Differences in the endoscopic closure of colonic perforation due to diagnostic or therapeutic colonoscopy. Scand J Gastroenterol 48:862–867CrossRef
20.
Chan W-K, Roslani AC, Law C-W, Goh K-L, Mahadeva S (2013) Clinical outcomes and direct costings of endoluminal clipping compared to surgery in the management of iatrogenic colonic perforation. J Dig Dis 14:670–675CrossRef
21.
Mangiavillano B, Viaggi P, Masci E (2010) Endoscopic closure of acute iatrogenic perforations during diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy in the gastrointestinal tract using metallic clips: a literature review. J Dig Dis 11:12–18CrossRef
22.
Tan CJ, Dasari BVM, Gardiner K (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of self-expanding metallic stents as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction. Br J Surg 99:469–476CrossRef
23.
Wullstein C, Köppen M, Gross E (1999) Laparoscopic treatment of colonic perforations related to colonoscopy. Surg Endosc 13:484–487CrossRef
24.
Hansen AJ, Tessier DJ, Anderson ML, Schlinkert RT (2007) Laparoscopic repair of colonoscopic perforations: indications and guidelines. J Gastrointest Surg 11:655–659CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Endoscopic perforations: what are the indications for surgery?
Authors
Diane Mege
Laura Beyer-Berjot
Walid Ezzedine
Anderson Loundou
Jean-Charles Grimaud
Marc Barthet
Stéphane Berdah
Publication date
01-07-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 7/2018
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6043-1

Other articles of this Issue 7/2018

Surgical Endoscopy 7/2018 Go to the issue

Video

Laparoscopic removal of retroperitoneal tumor with maneuver of hanging inferior vena cava

OriginalPaper

Randomized controlled study of intraincisional infiltration versus intraperitoneal instillation of standardized dose of ropivacaine 0.2% in post-laparoscopic cholecystectomy pain: Do we really need high doses of local anesthetics—time to rethink!

OriginalPaper

An observational study of the timing of surgery, use of laparoscopy and outcomes for acute cholecystitis in the USA and UK

OriginalPaper

Does advancement in stapling technology with triple-row and enhanced staple configurations confer additional safety? A matched comparison of 340 stapled ileocolic anastomoses

OriginalPaper

Hiatal hernia recurrence following magnetic sphincter augmentation and posterior cruroplasty: intermediate-term outcomes

Dynamic Manuscript

Transpapillary endopancreatic surgery: decompression of duct system and comparison of greenlight laser with monopolar electrosurgical device in ex vivo and in vivo animal models