Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “ESOPHAGEAL PERFORATION”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,477 records · Page 82Linked to original sources
PubMed2003

Perforating veins - a parameter of recurrence of esophageal varices.

OBJECTIVE: To study the role of perforating veins in predicting the likelihood of esophageal variceal rupture and variceal recurrences. METHODS: In 70 patients with esophageal varices, a 20 MHz ultrasonographic transducer was used to image esophageal varices; the radius and perforating veins were calculated. Esophageal variceal pressure measurements were obtained by noninvasive pressure gauge. The relationship between the size of esophageal varices and the presence of perforating veins in the esophageal wall was studied using chi-square test; the patients were divided into two groups according to the presence of perforating veins, and the pressure in each group was compared by using Student's t test. In addition, the frequency of endoscopy sessions necessary for varix eradication, the dots of endoscopic variceal ligation and recurrence of esophageal varices within a year were also compared by the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: The presence of perforating veins in the esophageal wall was significantly higher in patients with large radius of varices than in patients with small radius. The esophageal variceal pressure in patients with perforating veins was greater than that of patients without perforating veins (23+/- 4.5 vs 12+/-3.1 mmHg, p<0.05). The frequency of endoscopy sessions required for varix eradication and the dots of EVL in patients with perforating veins was greater than that in patients without perforating veins (3.25 +/- 0.50 vs. 2.11+/-.78; 25 +/-.50 vs. 18.56+/- 5.46 p<0.05). The recurrence of esophageal varices within a year was higher in patients with than in patients without perforating veins (75.93 vs. 18.75%, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Perforating veins in the esophageal wall correlate with the recurrence of esophageal varices in patients with portal hypertension

Adult↗
PubMed2000

[Accidental pyriform sinus perforation with Savary-Gilliard esophageal bougie during general anesthesia].

A 71-year-old female with esophagohiatal hernia underwent a laparoscopic Nissen's fundoplication under general anesthesia. During the operation a Savary-Gilliard bougie was temporarily inserted to the esophagus to prevent esophagostenosis. After the emergence from anesthesia, the patient complained of severe back pain and developed tachypnea and a low SpO2 associated with an enlargement of mediastinal shadow on the chest X-ray, suggesting mediastinal perforation. Examination by endoscopy and thoracotomy revealed a pyriform sinus perforation reaching down to the mediastinum. This case demonstrates the possibility of accidental perforation by various devices inserted blindly to esophagus, especially during general anesthesia, and the importance of close observation of patients after the emergence from anesthesia.

Aged↗
PubMed1990

Pharyngoesophageal perforation after blunt neck trauma.

Pharyngoesophageal perforation secondary to blunt neck trauma is an uncommon injury that can cause serious morbidity and mortality if not recognized and treated. Pharyngeal perforation secondary to blunt trauma sustained while boxing is reported. Review of the world literature found 10 cases of pharyngoesophageal perforation secondary to blunt neck trauma. Analysis of these cases indicates that perforations less than 2 cm and limited to the pharynx may be treated medically with close observation. Large perforations and those perforations that extend to the esophageal inlet or involve the esophagus exclusively are best treated surgically.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Laparoscopic reoperation after failed antireflux surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease has been established as being safe, effective, and the best alternative to continuous life-long medical therapy. Antireflux surgery is not, however, devoid of complications and failures. Treatment of these patients represents a major challenge, especially when reoperation is indicated. PATIENTS: One-hundred consecutive patients had a reoperation in our clinic. Previous antireflux procedures were laparoscopic (52 patients), laparotomy (39 patients), and thoracotomy (9 patients). RESULTS: Peri- or postoperative complications occurred in 30 patients (30%). Operative complications were stomach perforation (14), significant bleeding (6), esophageal mucosal perforation (4), gastrocutaneous fistula (2), small bowel enterotomy followed by fistula (1), and tension pneumothorax (1). Reoperation was required in only 2 patients because of a missed stomach perforation or persistent chest leak. The conversion rate (from laparoscopic to open procedure) was 17% overall. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic reoperation after a failed antireflux procedure is a major surgical challenge, and it is not devoid of morbidity. The surgeon must have extensive experience in laparoscopic surgery and should be able to perform reoperative open surgery through the abdomen and chest. Laparoscopic redo surgery is feasible with good results. Many patients in whom previous open surgery has failed enjoy the advantages of a laparoscopic redo procedure.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1997

[Perforation of the esophagus after esophageal manometry].

HISTORY AND FINDINGS: A 75-year-old man was admitted for oesophageal manometry because of dysphagia for the past 2 years and retrosternal burning sensation unrelated to exercise. His general condition was appropriate for his age. INVESTIGATIONS: An oesophagogram showed corkscrew-like deformation of a diffuse oesophageal spasm. The first, but incomplete, manometry recorded clearly propulsive contractions with markedly raised and prolonged pressure, as in "nutcracker oesophagus". The lower oesophageal sphincter could not be demonstrated initially. Subsequent pH measurements provided no evidence for increased gastrooesophageal reflux. TREATMENT AND FURTHER COURSE: After the first manometry conservative treatment was initiated with molsidomine, nifedipine and nitrospray sublingual, but the dysphagia was not significantly improved. A second manometry was performed before a planned surgical exploration. Placing of the catheter was again difficult and mild resistance experienced. Endoscopy revealed only minimal, presumably superficial, mucosal lesions. 2 days later bilateral pleural effusions together with mediastinitis occurred. Conservative treatment was continued until finally a distal oesophageal perforation was demonstrated. At surgery the perforation was seen and a oesophagectomy with gastric pull-through and intrathoracic anastomosis performed. However, the patient died of septic multi-organ failure. CONCLUSIONS: Oesophageal manometry is a safe but invasive method with few complications for measuring oesophageal motility. Although this has not previously been reported, oesophageal perforation with mediastinitis may end fatally, if the particular circumstances are unfavourable. In addition to special anatomical features, type and state of the manometric catheter may present a risk factor.

Aged↗