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 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1997

Esophageal perforation and caustic injury: management of perforated esophageal cancer.

Perforation of esophageal cancer is an unusual complication that most often results from instrumentation. The management of this condition must be individualized on the basis of the patient's condition and the stage of the cancer. For patients who are otherwise well and have localized disease, a standard resection is performed. Stent placement and esophageal exclusion are sometimes used for patients in good condition but in whom resection is not feasible. Supportive care alone is reserved for patients who have end-stage disease or are otherwise not candidates for aggressive therapy. Although the overall mortality rate is 50%, the risk for patients who undergo resection is less than 10%. This risk is similar to that found in patients undergoing elective resection and supports the concept that aggressive therapy should be pursued in highly selected patients with perforated esophageal cancers.

Esophageal Neoplasms↗
PubMed1988

Management of pediatric esophageal perforation.

Esophageal perforation is a serious complication necessitating immediate therapy. In a retrospective study we have evaluated the results in 13 children treated for esophageal perforation. Eleven of 13 perforations could be managed conservatively. In one child with extrapleural effusion, tube drainage was performed. The only death in this series occurred in a child who was brought for treatment after a 60-hour delay. Thoracotomy and multiple abscess drainage eventually proved unsuccessful. On the basis of our experience with children with esophageal perforation or with complications after esophageal atresia repair, we conclude that management of esophageal perforation in children differs substantially from therapy in adults and necessitates restrictive treatment guided by clinical symptoms.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed2004

Evolving options in the management of esophageal perforation.

Esophageal perforation remains a devastating event that is difficult to diagnose and manage. The majority of injuries are iatrogenic and the increasing use of endoscopic procedures can be expected to lead to an even higher incidence of esophageal perforation in coming years. Accurate diagnosis and effective treatment depend on early recognition of clinical features and accurate interpretation of diagnostic imaging. Outcome is determined by the cause and location of the injury, the presence of concomitant esophageal disease, and the interval between perforation and initiation of therapy. The overall mortality associated with esophageal perforation can approach 20%, and delay in treatment of more than 24 hours after perforation can result in a doubling of mortality. Surgical primary repair, with or without reinforcement, is the most successful treatment option in the management of esophageal perforation and reduces mortality by 50% to 70% compared with other interventional therapies.

Esophageal Perforation↗
PubMed1982

Esophageal perforation.

Esophageal perforation can be caused by any instrument, device, or foreign body reaching the hypopharynx. Diagnosis remains difficult. If esophageal perforation is suspected, Gastrografin (meglucamine diatrizoate) swallow study, eventually followed by barium swallow study, is the most useful diagnostic test. Absolute rules cannot be made about the selection of nonoperative or surgical treatment. If diagnosed early, cervical or thoracic esophageal perforations can sometimes be treated conservatively if there are no signs of systemic sepsis. Recurrent leakage after surgical closure is not unusual. Local tissue flaps can reinforce the closure, particularly after delayed operation, thereby often avoiding the necessity for a reoperation or an esophageal exclusion.

Esophageal Diseases↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Paraesophageal mediastinal drainage with diversion for delayed presentation of esophageal perforation.

Esophageal perforation is a serious condition; a delay of more than 48 hours in initiation of treatment leads to increased morbidity and mortality. Management of such patients is a surgical dilemma. We successfully managed 4 patients (2-iatrogenic, 1-tuberculous, 1-Boerhaave's syndrome) with delayed presentation of esophageal perforation by esophageal exclusion and paraesophageal mediastinal drainage, achieving good control of mediastinal sepsis, healing of perforation and at the same time avoiding thoracotomy and subsequent second surgery.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Short- and long-term outcome of esophageal perforation.

Esophageal perforation is an important complication of endoscopy and dilation, but few data are available regarding long-term outcome in these patients. Thirty-one consecutive patients with esophageal perforation were studied. Long-term outcome was determined by office follow-up and questionnaires via mail or telephone. The study group included 16 men and 15 women with a mean age of 61 +/- 4 years. Instrumentation was the principal cause of perforation (77%), and pain was the principal symptom in the majority of cases. However, some patients reported no pain, their only symptom being shortness of breast or dysphagia on swallowing saliva. Contrast examinations were used to establish the diagnosis, but results were initially negative in 3 of 27 patients (11%). Seven patients were treated nonsurgically (nasogastric drainage, antibiotics, and intravenous alimentation). Fourteen patients underwent primary closure of the esophageal rent. Six patients underwent surgical drainage, 3 underwent total esophagectomy, and 1 died during surgery before the esophagus was exposed. Thirty-day mortality was 6.4%. Mean hospital stay was 26 +/- 5 days. Postdischarge follow-up was available in 28 of the 29 patients (97%) surviving initial hospitalization, and the mean follow-up was 47 +/- 9 months. Nineteen patients had persistent dysphagia, and 6 underwent dilation again. One of these patients had a second perforation. Contrary to results of some earlier studies, the mortality from esophageal perforation was low in our study because of early intervention in suspected cases. Results of contrast studies are sometimes negative in the early stages after perforation, and studies may need to be repeated.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Diagnosis and management of esophageal perforations.

Esophageal perforation remains a difficult diagnostic and management problem. Recommendations regarding treatment remain controversial. A 15-year experience with perforation of the esophagus from all causes was reviewed at Louisiana State University and Veterans Administration, Medical Centers (Shreveport, LA). The majority of the injuries involved the thoracic esophagus (28 or 54%), followed by the cervical (21 or 40%), and the intraabdominal esophagus (3 or 6%). Iatrogenic causes constituted most of the injuries (52%), followed by external trauma (23%), barogenic rupture (15%), and ingested foreign bodies (10%). Diatrizoate methylglucamine 66 per cent, sodium diatrizoate 10 per cent (Gastrografin; Squibb, Princeton, NJ) contrast studies and flexible esophagoscopy were performed in 44 and 22 patients, respectively. In the cervical esophagus, contrast studies were more sensitive and specific than endoscopy (P less than .01), but both studies were equally effective as diagnostic methods in thoracic perforations. Cervical perforations were treated with either drainage alone (7 patients) or primary repair with drainage (14 patients) with an operative mortality of 4.8 per cent. Several procedures were used in thoracic perforations, which carried a mortality of 36 per cent and were more lethal than cervical tears (P less than 0.2). Any thoracic esophageal perforation treated more than 24 hours after the onset of symptoms, irrespective of what procedure was used, was associated with a significantly higher mortality than if operated on earlier (P less than .001). Five patients with perforated carcinomas were treated by esophageal resection with no mortality. Significantly higher mortality was seen with a delay in diagnosis, thoracic perforations, and Boerhaave's Syndrome. A subset of patients with perforated carcinomas may benefit from esophageal resection with delayed reconstruction.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1994

["Pericardiography" in endoscopy-induced esophageal perforation].

Esophageal perforations are rare but most often caused by instrumental lesions during endoscopy. We describe a cases of the iatrogen esophageal perforation accompanied with perforation of the pericardium. Chest radiograph with Gastrografin swallow revealed the perforation. The principles of operative treatment and the postoperative course are demonstrated.

Aged↗
PubMed1989

[Delayed diagnosis of esophageal perforation].

Esophageal perforation is a rare complication of endotracheal intubation. Usually clinical symptoms are manifested shortly after the injury. Delayed diagnosis and treatment are associated with high morbidity and mortality. In a 38-year-old woman esophageal perforation was diagnosed 31 days after its occurrence, but prompt treatment, including surgery, led to a successful outcome. It is recommended that all available means be used to diagnose suspected cases of this fatal complication as early as possible.

Adult↗
PubMed1994

Conservative management of endoscopic sclerotherapy-induced esophageal perforation.

Esophageal perforation is a rare though potentially lethal complication of variceal sclerotherapy. Diagnosis is usually made after recognition of often subtle clinical symptoms. Surgical and nonsurgical modalities have been proposed, and nonoperative management can be successful even in patients thought to have absolute indications for surgery.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Inflicted esophageal perforation.

Esophageal perforation in children is uncommon. A 2 1/2-year-old girl presented with multiple soft tissue injuries of various chronological ages. Initial lateral cervical spine films showed the presence of a prevertebral air collection with soft tissue swelling. Enhanced computerized tomography confirmed the presence of proximal esophageal rupture and a retropharyngeal abscess. External drainage of the abscess and intravenous antibiotics led to resolution of the perforation in 13 days. Discrepancies in the history and the constellation of injuries pointed to an inflicted etiology (through child abuse). Since 1984, 21 case studies have described inflicted esophageal perforation. Common mechanisms of injury include foreign body ingestion and blunt or penetrating external trauma. Early diagnosis of these injuries reduces both acute and long-term morbidity and mortality. Pediatric surgeons must be aware of inflicted injury as an etiology of esophageal and hypopharyngeal perforation.

Child Abuse↗
PubMed2000

Successful treatment of mediastinal gas gangrene due to esophageal perforation.

Esophageal perforation and mediastinal gas gangrene developed in a 55-year-old male after the endoscopic ethanol injection of a Mallory-Weiss ulcer. Initially, extensive gangrene of the esophagus and the mediastinum was treated by esophagectomy; however, an abundance of Clostridium perfringens in the Gram stain verified the presence of gas gangrene. Subsequently, the patient was transferred to a hyperbaric oxygen center, wherein a total of seven hyperbaric treatments were administered. The patient survived, and 4 months later, after having undergone several reoperations because of pleural empyema, mediastinal abscess, splenic rupture, and acalculous cholecystitis, was discharged and is still surviving.

Esophageal Perforation↗
PubMed2002

Misdiagnosing esophageal perforation as esophageal atresia.

We report a case of traumatic perforation of esophagus misdiagnosed as esophageal atresia in a 1.7 kg preterm (28 weeks) twin. Initial resistance to the passage of orogastric tube and failure of passage of contrast material down the esophagus prompted the diagnosis of esophageal atresia. Subsequently, the passage of orogastric tube as well as radiological findings at the age of 7 days made us change the diagnosis to traumatic perforation of esophagus. The baby was managed conservatively and discharged in good health at the age of 2 months. Literature is reviewed and the attention of pediatricians is drawn to this problem.

Diagnostic Errors↗
PubMed2002

Surgical management of esophageal perforation: role of esophageal conservation in delayed perforation.

Definitive repair of esophageal perforation is considered the preferred treatment for patients presenting early (<24 hours). However, the optimal management of delayed presentation (>24 hours) has not been well defined. This study examined the management of esophageal perforation and compared the outcomes of early versus delayed presentation. Records of patients admitted with the diagnosis of esophageal perforation were reviewed. Contrast studies were used to confirm the diagnosis in all cases. Patient demographics and outcome were analyzed to determine differences between early and delayed presentation. A total of 22 cases of esophageal perforation were identified (eight early vs 14 delayed presentations). Operative interventions included primary repair (four), reinforced repair (14) either with intercostal muscle or pleural flap, and a complete esophageal resection (one). Debridement and drainage without repair were done in two patients and a proximal intramural tear was treated with antibiotics and observation. Two patients died during hospitalization. All surviving patients had near-normal restoration of esophageal function. Follow-up at 3 years has shown minimal gastrointestinal problems. One patient required repeat esophageal dilatations and two patients underwent antireflux therapy. Esophageal repair should be considered in all cases of nonmalignant esophageal perforation and should not be influenced by the time of presentation.

Debridement↗
PubMed2000

Treatment of chronic contained spontaneous esophageal perforations.

Spontaneous esophageal perforations are associated with a high mortality and morbidity without surgery. The treatment mortality for early (<24) and late (>24 h) spontaneous esophageal perforations is reviewed as well as all recent cases of chronic spontaneous esophageal perforations. Chronic esophageal perforations with mediastinal cavities may be best treated by internal drainage of the cavity into the esophagus in order to convert the transmural perforation into an intramural esophageal dissection.

Chronic Disease↗
PubMed2004

Personal management of 57 consecutive patients with esophageal perforation.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal perforation is a surgical emergency associated with high morbidity and mortality. There is no consensus regarding the appropriate management of this life-threatening condition. METHODS: A retrospective review was made of 57 patients with esophageal perforations treated at the Department of Surgery, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India, between September 1986 and December 2001. RESULTS: Forty-four (77%) perforations were due to iatrogenic causes, spontaneous perforations occurred in 6 patients (11%). Foreign body ingestion caused perforation in 4 (7%), followed by blunt trauma in 2 (4%) and caustic injury in 1 patient. A total of 6 (11%) patients had cervical injury, 49 (86%) patients had thoracic, and 1 patient had abdominal esophageal injury. Thirty-three (58%) patients underwent emergency esophagectomy, 4 (7%) patients underwent primary repair, and 4 patients (7%) underwent drainage alone, whereas 16 (28%) patients were managed by nonoperative treatment. Using these treatment principles, we achieved 86% survival rate for all patients. Eight (14%) patients died. Spontaneous perforation had the highest mortality (67%). CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal perforation needs aggressive treatment. The treatment depends mainly on two factors: perforation in a healthy esophagus, and perforation with a preexisting underlying intrinsic esophageal disease causing distal obstruction. Esophageal perforation associated with stenotic lesions (benign or malignant) needs esophageal extirpation. Perforation in a healthy esophagus should be treated by primary closure if encountered early. Nonoperative conservative treatment is appropriate when esophageal perforation is encountered late.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

[Endoscopic treatment of iatrogenic esophageal perforation].

BACKGROUND: Esophageal perforations are the most frequent complications of endoscopy of the upper gastrointestinal tract. Life-threatening consequences such as mediastinitis, septic disease, or multiple organ failure are possible. Traditional surgical and conservative methods of treatment should be distinguished. In serious cases, thoracotomy in particular is a high-risk operation. PATIENTS AND RESULTS: This case demonstrates the successful endoscopic treatment of an esophageal perforation with mediastinal empyema by fibrin gluing. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal perforations up to 20 cm aboral and a maximum diameter of 1.5 cm could be treated by rigid endoscopical fibrin gluing. High-risk patients could be managed effectively avoiding extensive surgery.

Aged↗