Search

After gastrointestinal resections, leakages can occur, persist despite conventional therapy and result in enterocutaneous fistulae. We developed a combination method using flexible endoscopic techniques to seal the enteric orifice with an absorbable plug in addition to a percutaneously and fistuloscopically guided open-pore film drainage (Vac-Plug method). We retrospectively searched our endoscopy database to identify patients treated with the outlined technique. The clinical and pathological data were assessed, the method analyzed and characterized and the technical and clinical success determined. We identified 14 patients that were treated with the Vac-Plug method (4 females, 10 males with a mean age of 56 years, range 50–74). The patients were treated over a time period of 23 days (range 4–119) in between one to thirteen interventions (mean n = 5). One patient had to be excluded due to short follow-up after successful closure. Seventy-seven percent (10/13) were successfully treated with a median follow-up of 453 days (range 35–1246) thereafter. No treatment related complications occurred during the therapy. The data of the analysis showed that the Vac-Plug therapy is safe and successful in a relevant proportion of the patients. It is easy to learn and to apply and is well tolerated. In our opinion, it is a promising addition to the armamentarium of interventional methods of these difficult to treat patients. Of course, its usefulness must be further validated in larger prospective studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The treatment of anastomotic leakage after left colorectal surgery remains challenging. Since its introduction, endoscopic negative pressure therapy (ENPT) has proven to be advantageous, reducing the necessity of surgical revision. The aim of our study is to present our experience with endoscopic treatment of colorectal leakages and to identify potential factors influencing treatment outcome. Methods: Patients who underwent endoscopic treatment of colorectal leakage were retrospectively analyzed. Primary endpoint was the healing rate and success of endoscopic therapy. Results: We identified 59 patients treated with ENPT between January 2009 and December 2019. The overall closure rate was 83%, whereas only 60% of the patients were successfully treated with ENPT and 23% needed further surgery. The time between diagnosis of leakage and uptake of endoscopic treatment did not influence the closure rate, but patients with chronic fistula (> 4 weeks) showed a significantly higher reoperation rate than those with an acute fistula (94% vs 6%, p = 0.01). Conclusion: ENPT is a successful treatment option for colorectal leakages, which appears to be more favorable when started early. Further studies are still needed to better describe its healing potential, but it deserves an integral role in the interdisciplinary treatment of anastomotic leakages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Esophageal anastomotic leakage still represents a challenging complication after esophageal surgery. Endoscopically placed self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) are the treatment of choice, but since the introduction of endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) for esophageal leakage 10 years ago, increasing evidence has demonstrated that EVT might be a superior alternative. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and related morbidity of SEMS and EVT in the treatment of esophageal leak.Methods: We systematically searched for studies comparing SEMS and EVT to treat anastomotic leakage after esophageal surgery. Predefined end points including outcome, treatment success, endoscopy, treatment duration, hospitalization time, morbidity, and mortality were assessed and included in the meta-analysis.Results: Five retrospective studies including 274 patients matched the inclusion criteria. Compared with stenting, EVT was significantly associated with a higher rate of leak closure (odds ratio [OR] 3.14, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.23 to 7.98), more endoscopic device changes (pooled median difference of 3.09; 95 %CI 1.54 to 4.64]), a shorter duration of treatment (pooled median difference -11.90 days; 95 %CI -18.59 to -5.21 days), and a lower mortality rate (OR 0.39, 95 %CI 0.18 to 0.83). There were no significant differences in short-term and major complications.Conclusions: Owing to the retrospective quality of the studies with potential biases, the results of the meta-analysis must be interpreted with caution. However, the analysis indicates the potential benefit of EVT, which should be further investigated with standardized and prospectively collected data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]