Endoscopic vacuum therapy versus self-expandable metal stent for treatment of anastomotic leaks < 30 mm following oncologic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a matched case-control study.
Endoscopic vacuum therapy
Esophagectomy
Leak
Self-expandable metal stent
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2023
09 2023
Historique:
received:
09
02
2023
accepted:
12
06
2023
medline:
31
8
2023
pubmed:
24
6
2023
entrez:
23
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Management of anastomotic leaks after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy remains a challenge. Although intracavitary endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has shown great efficacy for large dehiscences, the optimal management of smaller leaks has not been standardized. This study aims to compare EVT versus self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) in the treatment of leaks < 30 mm in size, due to the lack of current data on this topic. Patients undergoing EVT (cases) or SEMS (controls) between May 2017 and July 2022 for anastomotic leaks < 3 cm following oncologic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy were enrolled. Controls were matched in a 1:1 ratio based on age (± 3 years), BMI (± 3 kg/m Cases (n = 22) and controls (n = 22) showed no difference in baseline characteristics and leak size, as per matching at enrollment. No differences were detected between the two groups in terms of time from surgery to endoscopic treatment (p = 0.11) or total number of procedures per patient (p = 0.05). Remarkably, the two groups showed comparable results in terms of leaks resolution (90.9% vs. 72.7%, p = 0.11). The number of procedures per patient was not significant between the two cohorts (p = 0.05). The most frequent complication in the SEMS group was migration (15.3% of procedures). EVT and SEMS seem to have similar efficacy outcomes in the treatment of anastomotic defects < 30 mm after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. However, larger studies are needed to corroborate these findings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Management of anastomotic leaks after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy remains a challenge. Although intracavitary endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has shown great efficacy for large dehiscences, the optimal management of smaller leaks has not been standardized. This study aims to compare EVT versus self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) in the treatment of leaks < 30 mm in size, due to the lack of current data on this topic.
METHODS
Patients undergoing EVT (cases) or SEMS (controls) between May 2017 and July 2022 for anastomotic leaks < 3 cm following oncologic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy were enrolled. Controls were matched in a 1:1 ratio based on age (± 3 years), BMI (± 3 kg/m
RESULTS
Cases (n = 22) and controls (n = 22) showed no difference in baseline characteristics and leak size, as per matching at enrollment. No differences were detected between the two groups in terms of time from surgery to endoscopic treatment (p = 0.11) or total number of procedures per patient (p = 0.05). Remarkably, the two groups showed comparable results in terms of leaks resolution (90.9% vs. 72.7%, p = 0.11). The number of procedures per patient was not significant between the two cohorts (p = 0.05). The most frequent complication in the SEMS group was migration (15.3% of procedures).
CONCLUSION
EVT and SEMS seem to have similar efficacy outcomes in the treatment of anastomotic defects < 30 mm after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. However, larger studies are needed to corroborate these findings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37353654
doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10213-8
pii: 10.1007/s00464-023-10213-8
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03962244']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
7039-7050Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A (2018) Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 68:394–424
doi: 10.3322/caac.21492
pubmed: 30207593
Busweiler LA, Wijnhoven BP, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Henneman D, van Grieken NC, Wouters MW, van Hillegersberg R, van Sandick JW, Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) Group (2016) Early outcomes from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit. Br J Surg 103:1855–1863
doi: 10.1002/bjs.10303
pubmed: 27704530
Low DE, Kuppusamy MK, Alderson D, Cecconello I, Chang AC, Darling G, Davies A, D’Journo XB, Gisbertz SS, Griffin SM, Hardwick R, Hoelscher A, Hofstetter W, Jobe B, Kitagawa Y, Law S, Mariette C, Maynard N, Morse CR, Nafteux P, Pera M, Pramesh CS, Puig S, Reynolds JV, Schroeder W, Smithers M, Wijnhoven BPL (2019) Benchmarking complications associated with esophagectomy. Ann Surg 269:291–298
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002611
pubmed: 29206677
Seesing MFJ, Gisbertz SS, Goense L, van Hillegersberg R, Kroon HM, Lagarde SM, Ruurda JP, Slaman AE, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Wijnhoven BPL (2017) A propensity score matched analysis of open versus minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy in the Netherlands. Ann Surg 266:839–846
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002393
pubmed: 28796016
Kassis ES, Kosinski AS, Ross P Jr, Koppes KE, Donahue JM, Daniel VC (2013) Predictors of anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: an analysis of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons general thoracic database. Ann Thorac Surg 96:1919–1926
doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.07.119
pubmed: 24075499
Mandarino FV, Esposito D, Spelta GNE, Cavestro GM, Rosati R, Parise P, Gemma MF, Fanti L (2022) Double layer stent for the treatment of leaks and fistula after upper gastrointestinal oncologic surgery: a retrospective study. Updates Surg 74:1055–1062
doi: 10.1007/s13304-021-01155-8
pubmed: 34510378
Aryaie AH, Singer JL, Fayezizadeh M, Lash J, Marks JM (2017) Efficacy of endoscopic management of leak after foregut surgery with endoscopic covered self-expanding metal stents (SEMS). Surg Endosc 31:612–617
doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5005-8
pubmed: 27317034
Zhang CC, Liesenfeld L, Klotz R, Koschny R, Rupp C, Schmidt T, Diener MK, Müller-Stich BP, Hackert T, Sauer P, Büchler MW, Schaible A (2021) Feasibility, effectiveness, and safety of endoscopic vacuum therapy for intrathoracic anastomotic leakage following transthoracic esophageal resection. BMC Gastroenterol 21:72
doi: 10.1186/s12876-021-01651-6
pubmed: 33593301
pmcid: 7885467
Chon SH, Brunner S, Müller DT, Lorenz F, Stier R, Streller L, Eckhoff J, Straatman J, Babic B, Schiffmann LM, Schröder W, Schmidt T, Bruns CJ, Fuchs HF (2022) Time to endoscopic vacuum therapy—lessons learned after > 150 robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomies (RAMIE) at a German high-volume center. Surg Endosc 37:741–748
doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09754-1
pubmed: 36344896
pmcid: 9640783
Min YW, Kim T, Lee H, Min BH, Kim HK, Choi YS, Lee JH, Rhee PL, Kim JJ, Zo JI, Shim YM (2019) Endoscopic vacuum therapy for postoperative esophageal leak. BMC Surg 19:37
doi: 10.1186/s12893-019-0497-5
pubmed: 30975210
pmcid: 6458610
Chon SH, Berlth F, Dratsch T, Plum PS, Lorenz F, Goeser T, Bruns CJ (2022) Outcome of prophylactic endoscopic vacuum therapy for high-risk anastomosis after esophagectomy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 31:1079–1085
doi: 10.1080/13645706.2022.2051719
pubmed: 35344462
Mandarino FV, Barchi A, Biamonte P, Esposito D, Azzolini F, Fanti L, Danese S (2022) The prophylactic use of endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic dehiscence after rectal anterior resection: is it feasible for redo surgery? Tech Coloproctol 26:319–320
doi: 10.1007/s10151-021-02566-w
pubmed: 34981274
Loske G, Schorsch T, Müller C (2011) Intraluminal and intracavitary vacuum therapy for esophageal leakage: a new endoscopic minimally invasive approach. Endoscopy 43:540–544
doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1256345
pubmed: 21448855
Reimer S, Lock JF, Flemming S, Weich A, Widder A, Plaßmeier L, Döring A, Hering I, Hankir MK, Meining A, Germer CT, Groneberg K, Seyfried F (2022) Endoscopic management of large leakages after upper gastrointestinal surgery. Front Surg 9:885244
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.885244
pubmed: 35615653
pmcid: 9124894
Mandarino FV, Barchi A, Fanti L, D'Amico F, Azzolini F, Esposito D, Biamonte P, Lauri G, Danese S (2022) Endoscopic vacuum therapy for post-esophagectomy anastomotic dehiscence as rescue treatment: a single center case series. Esophagus 19:417–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10388-022-00912-x
doi: 10.1007/s10388-022-00912-x
pubmed: 35347509
Brangewitz M, Voigtländer T, Helfritz FA, Lankisch TO, Winkler M, Klempnauer J, Manns MP, Schneider AS, Wedemeyer J (2013) Endoscopic closure of esophageal intrathoracic leaks: stent versus endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure, a retrospective analysis. Endoscopy 45:433–438
doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1326435
pubmed: 23733727
Hwang JJ, Jeong YS, Park YS, Yoon H, Shin CM, Kim N, Lee DH (2016) Comparison of endoscopic vacuum therapy and endoscopic stent implantation with self-expandable metal stent in treating postsurgical gastroesophageal leakage. Medicine 95:e3416
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003416
pubmed: 27100431
pmcid: 4845835
Berlth F, Bludau M, Plum PS, Herbold T, Christ H, Alakus H, Kleinert R, Bruns CJ, Hölscher AH, Chon SH (2019) Self-expanding metal stents versus endoscopic vacuum therapy in anastomotic leak treatment after oncologic gastroesophageal surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 23:67–75
doi: 10.1007/s11605-018-4000-x
pubmed: 30374816
Mennigen R, Harting C, Lindner K, Vowinkel T, Rijcken E, Palmes D, Senninger N, Laukoetter MG (2015) Comparison of endoscopic vacuum therapy versus stent for anastomotic leak after esophagectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 19:1229–1235
doi: 10.1007/s11605-015-2847-7
pubmed: 25967140
El-Sourani N, Miftode S, Bockhorn M, Arlt A, Meinhardt C (2022) Endoscopic management of anastomotic leakage after esophageal surgery: ten year analysis in a tertiary university center. Clin Endosc 55:58–66
doi: 10.5946/ce.2021.099
pubmed: 34645084
Senne M, Werner CR, Schempf U, Thiel K, Königsrainer A, Wichmann D (2022) Comparison of two endoscopic therapeutic interventions as primary treatment for anastomotic leakages after total gastrectomy. Cancers 14:2982
doi: 10.3390/cancers14122982
pubmed: 35740645
pmcid: 9220783
Eichelmann AK, Ismail S, Merten J, Slepecka P, Palmes D, Laukötter MG, Pascher A, Mardin WA (2021) Economic burden of endoscopic vacuum therapy compared to alternative therapy methods in patients with anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 25:2447–2454
doi: 10.1007/s11605-021-04955-w
pubmed: 33629233
pmcid: 8523444
Schniewind B, Schafmayer C, Voehrs G, Egberts J, von Schoenfels W, Rose T, Kurdow R, Arlt A, Ellrichmann M, Jürgensen C, Schreiber S, Becker T, Hampe J (2013) Endoscopic endoluminal vacuum therapy is superior to other regimens in managing anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy: a comparative retrospective study. Surg Endosc 27:3883–3890
doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-2998-0
pubmed: 23708716
Low DE, Alderson D, Cecconello I, Chang AC, Darling GE, D’Journo XB, Griffin SM, Hölscher AH, Hofstetter WL, Jobe BA, Kitagawa Y, Kucharczuk JC, Law SY, Lerut TE, Maynard N, Pera M, Peters JH, Pramesh CS, Reynolds JV, Smithers BM, van Lanschot JJ (2015) International consensus on standardization of data collection for complications associated with esophagectomy: Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG). Ann Surg 262:286–294
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001098
pubmed: 25607756
Li H, Zhuang S, Yan H, Wei W, Su Q (2021) Risk factors of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis. Front Surg 8:743266
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.743266
pubmed: 34621781
pmcid: 8491789
Hagens ERC, Reijntjes MA, Anderegg MCJ, Eshuis WJ, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Gisbertz SS (2021) Risk factors and consequences of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy for cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 112:255–263
doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.08.022
pubmed: 33075324
Pournaras DJ, Hardwick RH, Safranek PM, Sujendran V, Bennett J, Macaulay GD, Hindmarsh A (2018) Endoluminal vacuum therapy (E-Vac): a treatment option in oesophagogastric surgery. World J Surg 42:2507–2511
doi: 10.1007/s00268-018-4463-7
pubmed: 29372375
pmcid: 6060786
van den Berg MW, Kerbert AC, van Soest EJ, Schwartz MP, Bakker CM, Gilissen LP, van Hooft JE (2016) Safety and efficacy of a fully covered large-diameter self-expanding metal stent for the treatment of upper gastrointestinal perforations, anastomotic leaks, and fistula. Dis Esophagus 29:572–579
doi: 10.1111/dote.12363
pubmed: 25893629
Anderloni A, Genco C, Massidda M, Di Leo M, Fumagalli UR, Rosati R, Correale L, Maselli R, Ferrara EC, Jovani M, Repici A (2019) Self-expanding metal stents for the treatment of post-surgical esophageal leaks: a tertiary referral center experience. Dig Surg 36:309–316
doi: 10.1159/000489817
pubmed: 29870974
Scognamiglio P, Reeh M, Melling N (2022) Management of intra-thoracic anastomotic leakages after esophagectomy: updated systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic vacuum therapy versus stenting. BMC Surg 22:309
doi: 10.1186/s12893-022-01764-z
pubmed: 35953796
pmcid: 9367146
Scognamiglio P, Reeh M, Melling N, Kantowski M, Eichelmann AK, Chon SH, El-Sourani N, Schön G, Höller A, Izbicki JR, Tachezy M (2020) Endoscopic vacuum therapy versus stenting for postoperative esophago-enteric anastomotic leakage: systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 52:632–642
doi: 10.1055/a-1149-1741
pubmed: 32316043
Rausa E, Asti E, Aiolfi A, Bianco F, Bonitta G, Bonavina L (2018) Comparison of endoscopic vacuum therapy versus endoscopic stenting for esophageal leaks: systematic review and meta-analysis. Dis Esophagus. https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doy060
doi: 10.1093/dote/doy060
pubmed: 29939229
Mandarino FV, Barchi A, D’Amico F, Fanti L, Azzolini F, Viale E, Esposito D, Rosati R, Fiorino G, Bemelman WA, Elmore U, Barbieri L, Puccetti F, Testoni SGG, Danese S (2023) Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) versus self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) for anastomotic leaks after upper gastrointestinal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Life (Basel) 13:287
pubmed: 36836644
Jung DH, Huh CW, Min YW, Park JC (2022) Endoscopic vacuum therapy for the management of upper GI leaks and perforations: a multicenter retrospective study of factors associated with treatment failure (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 95:281–290
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2021.09.018
pubmed: 34555386
Tachezy M, Chon SH, Rieck I, Kantowski M, Christ H, Karstens K, Gebauer F, Goeser T, Rösch T, Izbicki JR, Bruns CJ (2021) Endoscopic vacuum therapy versus stent treatment of esophageal anastomotic leaks (ESOLEAK): study protocol for a prospective randomized phase 2 trial. Trials 22:377
doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05315-4
pubmed: 34078426
pmcid: 8170795