Utility of endoscopic therapy in the management of Boerhaave syndrome

Background/aims: The optimal intervention for Boerhaave perforation has not been determined. Options include surgical repair with/without a pedicled muscle flap, T tube placement, esophageal resection or diversion, or an endoscopic approach. All management strategies require adequate drainage and nutritional support. Our aim was to evaluate outcomes following Boerhaave perforation treated with surgery, endoscopic therapy, or both.

Patients and methods: We performed a 10-year review of our prospectively maintained databases of adult patients with Boerhaave perforations. We documented clinical presentation, extent of injury, primary intervention, “salvage” treatment (any treatment for persistent leak), and outcome. Results were analyzed using the Fisher’s exact and Kruskal – Wallis tests.

Results: Between October 2004 and October 2014, 235 patients presented with esophageal leak/fistula with 17 Boerhaave perforations. Median age was 68 years. Median length of perforation was 1.25 cm (range 0.8 – 5 cm). Four patients presented with systemic sepsis (two treated with palliative stent and two surgically). Primary endotherapy was performed for eight (50 %) and primary surgery for eight (50 %) patients. Two endotherapy patients required multiple stents. Median stent duration was 61 days (range 56 – 76). “Salvage” intervention was required in 2/8 (25 %) endotherapy patients and 1/8 (13 %) surgery patient (stent). All patients healed without resection/reconstruction. There were no deaths in the surgically treated group and two in the endotherapy group (stented with palliative intent due to poor systemic condition). Readmission within 30 days occurred in 3/6 of alive endotherapy patients (50 %) and 0/8 surgery patients. Re-intervention within 30 days was required for one endotherapy patient.

Conclusion: Endoscopic repair of Boerhaave perforations can be useful in carefully selected patients without evidence of systemic sepsis. Endoscopic therapy such as stenting is particularly valuable as a “salvage” intervention. The benefits of endoscopic therapy and esophageal preservation are offset against an increased risk of readmission in patients primarily treated endoscopically.

• References

• 1 Biancari F, D’Andrea V, Paone R et al. Current treatment and outcome of esophageal perforations in adults: systematic review and metaanalysis of 75 studies. World J Surg 2013; 37: 1051-1059
• 2 Dasari BV, Neeley D, Kennedy A et al. The role of esophageal stents in the management of esophageal anastomotic leaks and benign esophageal perforations. Ann Surg 2014; 259: 852-860
• 3 Raju GS, Shibukawa G, Ahmed I et al. Endoluminal suturing may overcome the limitations of clip closure of a gaping wide colon. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 65: 906-911
• 4 Pham BV, Raju GS, Ahmed I et al. Immediate endoscopic closure of colon perforation by using a prototype endoscopic suturing device: feasibility and outcome in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 64: 113-119
• 5 Wasano K, Hashiguchi S, Suzuki N et al. Transoral closure of pharyngeal perforation caused by gastrointestinal endoscopy. Auris Nasus Larynx 2014; 41: 113-117
• 6 Schaheen L, Blackmon SH, Nason KS. Optimal approach to the management of intrathoracic esophageal leak following esophagectomy: a systematic review. Am J Surg 2014; 208: 536-543
• 7 Stephens EH, Correa AM, Kim MP et al. Classification of esophageal stent leaks: leak presentation, complications and management. Ann Thorac Surg 2014; 98: 297-304
• 8 Fujii LL, Bonin EA, Baron TH et al. Utility of an endoscopic suturing system for the prevention of covered luminal stent migration in the upper GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 78: 787-793
• 9 Kumta NA, Boumitri C, Kahaleh M. New devices and techniques for handling adverse events: claw, suture or cover?. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2015; 25: 159-168
• 10 Lindenmann J, Matzi V, Neuboeck N et al. Management of esophageal perforation in 120 consecutive patients: clinical impact of a structured treatment algorithm. J Gastrointest Surg 2013; 17: 1036-1043
• 11 Sulpice L, Dileon S, Rayar M et al. Conservative surgical management of Boerhaave’s syndrome: experience of two tertiary referral centers. Int J Surg 2013; 11: 64-67
• 12 Cho JS, Kim YD, Kim JW et al. Thoracoscopic primary esophageal repair in patients with Boerhaave’s syndrome. Ann Thorac Surg 2011; 91: 1552-1555
• 13 Musala C, Eisendrath P, Brasseur A et al. Successful treatment of Boerhaave syndrome with an over the scope clip. Endoscopy 2015; 47: E24-5
• 14 Van Weyenberg SJ, Stam FJ, Marsman W. Successful endoscopic closure of spontaneous esophageal rupture (Boerhaave syndrome). Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80: 162
• 15 Kobara H, Mori H, Rafiq K et al. Successful endoscopic treatment of Boerhaave syndrome using an over-the-scope clip. Endoscopy 2014; 46: E82-83
• 16 D’Cuhna J, Rueth NM, Groth SS et al. Esophageal stents for anastomotic leaks and perforations. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011; 142: 39-46
• 17 Han XW, Li YD, Wu G et al. New covered mushroom shaped metallic stent for managing anastomotic leak after esophagogastrostomy with a wide gastric tube. Ann Thorac Surg 2006; 82: 702-706
• 18 Jiang F, Yu MF, Ren BH et al. Nasogastric placement of a sump tube through the leak for the treatment of esophagogastric anastomotic leak after esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma. J Surg Res 2011; 171: 448-451
• 19 Kim AW, Liptay MJ, Snow N et al. Utility of silicone esophageal bypass stents in the management of delayed complex esophageal disruptions. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85: 1962-1967
• 20 Pennathur A, Chang AC, McGrath KM et al. Polyflex expandable stents in the treatment of esophageal disease: initial experience. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85: 1968-1972
• 21 Schweigert M, Dubecz A, Stadlhuber RJ et al. Risks of stent related aortic erosion after endoscopic stent insertion for intrathoracic anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 2011; 92: 513-518