Top

Published in:

01-03-2019 | Original Scientific Report (including Papers Presented at Surgical Conferences)

Outcome of Self-Expanding Metal Stents in the Treatment of Anastomotic Leaks After Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy

Authors: Patrick Sven Plum, Till Herbold, Felix Berlth, Hildegard Christ, Hakan Alakus, Marc Bludau, De-Hua Chang, Christiane Josephine Bruns, Arnulf Heinrich Hölscher, Seung-Hun Chon

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 3/2019

Abstract

Background

Esophageal anastomotic leakages after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy are severe and life-threatening complications. We analyzed the outcome of using self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in the treatment of postoperative leakage after esophagogastrostomy.

Methods

Seventy patients with esophageal anastomotic leakage after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer who had received SEMS treatment between January 2006 and December 2015 at our clinic were identified in this retrospective study. The patients were analyzed according to demographic characteristics, risk factors, leakage characteristics, stent characteristics, stent-related complications, sealing success rate and mortality.

Results

Over a 10-year period, 70 patients received SEMS as treatment for postoperative anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy. Technical success of esophageal stenting in anastomotic leakage was achieved in 50 out of 70 cases (71.4%). Sealing success rate was 70% (n = 49) with a median treatment of 28 days (range 7–87). In 20 patients (28.6%), stent-related complications, such as stenosis, dislocation, leakage persistence, perforation or esophagotracheal fistula occurred after the SEMS treatment. Sixty-one patients (87.1%) survived SEMS treatment of esophagogastric anastomotic leakage. Mean follow-up for all patients was 38 months (IQR 10–76), and no significant difference was found in a comparison of the long-term survival rate between patients with successful and unsuccessful SEMS treatment.

Conclusions

The management of esophageal anastomotic leaks after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with SEMS is effective, safe and technically feasible. Aggressive non-surgical management should be considered when developing a treatment plan for stenting.

Xie SH, Mattsson F, Lagergren J (2017) Incidence trends in oesophageal cancer by histological type: an updated analysis in Sweden. Cancer Epidemiol 47:114–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2017.02.004 CrossRefPubMed

Orringer MB, Marshall B, Iannettoni MD (2000) Eliminating the cervical esophagogastric anastomotic leak with a side- to-side stapled anastomosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 119:277–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5223(00)70183-8 CrossRefPubMed

Glatz T, Marjanovic G, Kulemann B et al (2017) Hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy vs. open esophagectomy: a matched case analysis in 120 patients. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 402:323–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-017-1550-4 CrossRef

Straatman J, van der Wielen N, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP et al (2017) Techniques and short-term outcomes for total minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophageal resection in distal esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers: pooled data from six European centers. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 31:119–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4938-2 CrossRef

Zhou C, Zhang L, Wang H et al (2015) Superiority of minimally invasive oesophagectomy in reducing in-hospital mortality of patients with resectable oesophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 10:e0132889. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132889 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

van Workum F, van der Maas J, van den Wildenberg FJH et al (2017) Improved functional results after minimally invasive esophagectomy: intrathoracic versus cervical anastomosis. Ann Thorac Surg 103:267–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.07.010 CrossRefPubMed

Singhal S, Kailasam A, Akimoto S et al (2017) Simple technique of circular stapled anastomosis in Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 27:288–294. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2016.0443 CrossRef

Junemann-Ramirez M, Awan MY, Khan ZM, Rahamim JS (2005) Anastomotic leakage post-esophagogastrectomy for esophageal carcinoma: retrospective analysis of predictive factors, management and influence on longterm survival in a high volume centre. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 27:3–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcts.2004.09.018 CrossRefPubMed

Vande Walle C, Ceelen WP, Boterberg T et al (2012) Anastomotic complications after ivor lewis esophagectomy in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation are related to radiation dose to the gastric fundus. Int J Radiat Oncol 82:e513–e519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.05.071 CrossRef

10.

Wedemeyer J, Schneider A, Manns MP, Jackobs S (2008) Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure of upper intestinal anastomotic leaks. Gastrointest Endosc 67:708–711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2007.10.064 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Bludau M, Hölscher AH, Herbold T et al (2014) Management of upper intestinal leaks using an endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure system (E-VAC). Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 28:896–901. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3244-5 CrossRef

12.

Loske G, Schorsch T, Müller C (2010) Endoscopic vacuum sponge therapy for esophageal defects. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 24:2531–2535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-0998-x CrossRef

13.

Persson S, Rouvelas I, Kumagai K et al (2016) Treatment of esophageal anastomotic leakage with self-expanding metal stents: analysis of risk factors for treatment failure. Endosc Int Open 04:E420–E426. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-102878 CrossRef

14.

Fernández A, González-Carrera V, González-Portela C et al (2015) Fully covered metal stents for the treatment of leaks after gastric and esophageal surgery. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 107:608–613PubMed

15.

Eizaguirre E, Larburu S, Asensio JI et al (2016) Treatment of anastomotic leaks with metallic stent after esophagectomies. Dis Esophagus 29:86–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/dote.12298 CrossRefPubMed

16.

Hoeppner J, Kulemann B, Seifert G et al (2014) Covered self-expanding stent treatment for anastomotic leakage: outcomes in esophagogastric and esophagojejunal anastomoses. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 28:1703–1711. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3379-4 CrossRef

17.

Freeman RK, Vyverberg A, Ascioti AJ (2011) Esophageal stent placement for the treatment of acute intrathoracic anastomotic leak after esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 92:204–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.02.016 CrossRefPubMed

18.

Leers JM, Vivaldi C, Schäfer H et al (2009) Endoscopic therapy for esophageal perforation or anastomotic leak with a self-expandable metallic stent. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 23:2258–2262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0302-5 CrossRef

19.

Kauer WKH, Stein HJ, Dittler H-J, Siewert JR (2008) Stent implantation as a treatment option in patients with thoracic anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy. Surg Endosc 22:50–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9504-5 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Schweigert M, Solymosi N, Dubecz A et al (2013) Endoscopic stent insertion for anastomotic leakage following oesophagectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 95:43–47. https://doi.org/10.1308/003588413X13511609956255 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Nguyen NT, Rudersdorf PD, Smith BR et al (2011) Management of gastrointestinal leaks after minimally invasive esophagectomy: conventional treatments vs. endoscopic stenting. J Gastrointest Surg 15:1952–1960. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-011-1658-8 CrossRefPubMed

22.

Aryaie AH, Singer JL, Fayezizadeh M et al (2017) Efficacy of endoscopic management of leak after foregut surgery with endoscopic covered self-expanding metal stents (SEMS). Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 31:612–617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5005-8 CrossRef

23.

Low DE, Alderson D, Cecconello I et al (2015) International consensus on standardization of data collection for complications associated with esophagectomy: esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG). Ann Surg 262:286–294. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001098 CrossRefPubMed

24.

Hölscher AH, Bollschweiler E, Schröder W et al (2011) Prognostic impact of upper, middle, and lower third mucosal or submucosal infiltration in early esophageal cancer. Ann Surg 254:802–807; discussion 807–808. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e3182369128

25.

Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C (2009) TNM classification of malignant tumours, 7th edn. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken

26.

Strauss C, Mal F, Perniceni T et al (2010) Computed tomography versus water-soluble contrast swallow in the detection of intrathoracic anastomotic leak complicating esophagogastrectomy (Ivor Lewis): a prospective study in 97 patients. Ann Surg 251:647–651. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181c1aeb8 CrossRefPubMed

27.

Hu Z, Wang X, An X et al (2017) The diagnostic value of routine contrast esophagram in anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy. World J Surg 41:2062–2067. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-017-3923-9 CrossRefPubMed

28.

Cools-Lartigue J, Andalib A, Abo-Alsaud A et al (2014) Routine contrast esophagram has minimal impact on the postoperative management of patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 21:2573–2579. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3654-1 CrossRefPubMed

29.

Feith M, Gillen S, Schuster T et al (2011) Healing occurs in most patients that receive endoscopic stents for anastomotic leakage; dislocation remains a problem. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 9:202–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2010.12.010 CrossRefPubMed

30.

Schubert D, Scheidbach H, Kuhn R et al (2005) Endoscopic treatment of thoracic esophageal anastomotic leaks by using silicone-covered, self-expanding polyester stents. Gastrointest Endosc 61:891–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(05)00325-1 CrossRefPubMed

31.

El Hajj II, Imperiale TF, Rex DK et al (2014) Treatment of esophageal leaks, fistulae, and perforations with temporary stents: evaluation of efficacy, adverse events, and factors associated with successful outcomes. Gastrointest Endosc 79:589–598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2013.08.039 CrossRefPubMed

32.

Dent B, Griffin SM, Jones R et al (2016) Management and outcomes of anastomotic leaks after oesophagectomy. Br J Surg 103:1033–1038. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.10175 CrossRefPubMed

33.

Dasari BVM, Neely D, Kennedy A et al (2014) The role of esophageal stents in the management of esophageal anastomotic leaks and benign esophageal perforations. Ann Surg 259:852–860. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000564 CrossRefPubMed

34.

Freeman RK, Ascioti AJ, Dake M, Mahidhara RS (2015) An assessment of the optimal time for removal of esophageal stents used in the treatment of an esophageal anastomotic leak or perforation. Ann Thorac Surg 100:422–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.03.085 CrossRefPubMed

35.

Messager M, Warlaumont M, Renaud F et al (2017) Recent improvements in the management of esophageal anastomotic leak after surgery for cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 43:258–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2016.06.394 CrossRefPubMed

Title: Outcome of Self-Expanding Metal Stents in the Treatment of Anastomotic Leaks After Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy
Authors: Patrick Sven Plum
Till Herbold
Felix Berlth
Hildegard Christ
Hakan Alakus
Marc Bludau
De-Hua Chang
Christiane Josephine Bruns
Arnulf Heinrich Hölscher
Seung-Hun Chon
Publication date: 01-03-2019
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: World Journal of Surgery / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-018-4832-2

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Outcome of Self-Expanding Metal Stents in the Treatment of Anastomotic Leaks After Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Complications After Ostomy Surgery: Emergencies and Obese Patients are at Risk—Data from the Berlin OStomy Study (BOSS)

Procedure-Specific Volume and Nurse-to-Patient Ratio: Implications for Failure to Rescue Patients Following Liver Surgery

The Short-Form Inguinal Pain Questionnaire (sf-IPQ): An Instrument for Rating Groin Pain After Inguinal Hernia Surgery in Daily Clinical Practice

Intraoperative Fluid Administration and Surgical Outcomes Following Pancreaticoduodenectomy: External Validation at a Tertiary Referral Center

Decision-Making in the Emergency Laparotomy: A Mixed Methodology Study

Propensity-Matched Analysis Comparing Survival After Hybrid Thoracoscopic–Laparotomy Esophagectomy and Complete Thoracoscopic–Laparoscopic Esophagectomy