Impact of endoscopic assessment and treatment on operative and non-operative management of acute oesophageal perforation.

BACKGROUND

Surgeons have not typically utilized an endoscopic approach for diagnosis and management of acute oesophageal perforation, mainly due to fears of increased mediastinal contamination. This study assessed the evolution of endoscopic approaches and their effect on outcomes over time in acute oesophageal perforation.

METHODS

All patients with documented acute oesophageal perforation between 1990 and 2009 were enrolled prospectively in an Institutional Review Board-approved database.

RESULTS

Of 81 patients who presented during the study period, 52 had upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for diagnosis alone (12 patients; 23 per cent) or as a component of acute management (40 patients; 77 per cent). Use of endoscopy increased from four of 13 patients in the first 5 years of the study to 20 of 24 patients in the final 5 years. Endoscopy was used in conjunction with surgery in 28 patients, of whom 21 underwent primary repair, three had resection, and one a diversion; 12 patients in this group had hybrid operations (combination of surgical and endoscopic management). Primary endoscopic treatment was used in 15 patients (29 per cent), most commonly involving stent placement (7). Of those having endoscopy, complication rates improved (from 3 of 4 to 8 of 20 patients), as did mean length of stay (from 21·8 to 13·4 days) between the initial and final 5 years of the study. There were two deaths (4 per cent). Of 21 patients who had both endoscopic assessment and management in the operating room, endoscopy identified additional pathology in ten, leading to a change in management plan in five patients.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopy is a safe and important component of the management of acute oesophageal perforation. It provides additional information that modifies treatment, and its wider use should result in improved outcomes.