Erratum: Missed Proximal Tracheoesophageal Fistula (TEF) in a Neonate with Type D Esophageal Atresia.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-2227-6389.].

Missed Proximal Tracheoesophageal Fistula (TEF) in a Neonate with Type D Esophageal Atresia.

We present the case of a patient with the rare type D esophageal atresia (EA), diagnosed after correction of an EA initially diagnosed as type C. Routine postoperative contrast esophagogram showed a missed proximal tracheoesophageal fistula. This case report illustrates the potential difficulties to diagnose type D EA.

Unintentional Suture Fistula Between the Proximal and Distal Esophagus in a Preterm Neonate with Type C Esophageal Atresia.

We present the case of a patient with gross type C esophageal atresia in a preterm neonate (gestational age of 31 weeks + 1 day) with a birth weight of 1,470 g. The fistula was released via a thoracotomy, but no primary anastomosis could be made, due to an unexpected long gap. The distal esophagus was closed and approximated to the blind pouch using traction sutures until an adjacent position was reached. A gastrostomy was created for enteral feeding. Although a second attempt to make an anastomosis was unsuccessful, the patient unexpectedly developed a suture fistula 6 weeks after the first procedure, enabling feeding via a nasogastric tube. Over time, six dilations were necessary. Full enteral feeding was achieved at the age of 6 months. Our case confirms sparse reports that deliberately creating a suture fistula may be a solution in esophageal atresia patients when an unexpected long gap prohibits a primary anastomosis.

Incidence and causes of failure in various anatomical pouch designs 20 years after surgical primary ileal-pouch anal anastomosis construction.

PURPOSE: Since the introduction of ileo-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) surgery, various pouch designs have been applied. Recently, there has been renewed interest in creating larger pouch designs to reduce defecation frequency after pouch surgery. The aim of this study was to assess chronic pouch failure (PF) rates and causes in alternative S or septated (SP) pouches when compared to J pouches and B- shaped adaptations. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients that underwent primary IPAA construction surgery from 1978-2000. Pouch designs were subdivided in J and B (J/B), and larger pouches (S/SP). PF included need for a pouch excision, redo pouch procedure, revisional pouch surgery, or permanent ileostomy surgery. Outcomes of this study were incidence and causes for PF per pouch design group. RESULTS: Out of 200 patients who underwent IPAA surgery, 19 had an S/SP design and 181 had a J/B design. After a follow-up of 27.0 (IQR 23.3 - 29.0) years, 45/200 (22.5%) patients who underwent IPAA surgery between 1975-2000 developed PF. Some 78.9% of patients with an S/SP pouch developed PF, compared to 16.7% of patients with a J/B pouch (p < 0.01). Mechanical outlet issues occurred more often in S/SP pouches when compared to J/B (42.1% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.01), and were predominantly caused by septal- or pouch wall intussusception and efferent loop kinking (S-pouch). CONCLUSION: Despite an inevitable proportion of bias, the current study revealed that S/SP pouches were characterized by an increased PF incidence due to emptying problems after long-term follow-up when compared to J/B pouches. Constructing an S pouch or large septated reservoir at index surgery should therefore be questioned because of a shorter longevity.

Clinical relevance of endoscopic peri-appendiceal red patch in ulcerative colitis patients.

Background: Increasing evidence is suggesting appendectomy as an alternative treatment for ulcerative colitis (UC), especially in case of histological appendiceal inflammation. Therefore, preoperative identification of appendiceal inflammation could be beneficial. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of peri-appendiceal red patch (PARP) on colonoscopy. In addition, prognostic relevance of PARP for disease course and its predictive value for histological appendiceal inflammation in patients undergoing appendectomy was assessed. Methods: UC patients undergoing colonoscopy in 2014/2015 were included to determine PARP-prevalence in a cross-sectional study. Findings were correlated to patient and disease characteristics, upscaling of treatment and colectomy rates after cross-sectional colonoscopy. In patients undergoing appendiceal resection, histopathological inflammation was assessed using the Robarts Histopathology Index (RHI). Results: In total, 249 patients were included of which 17.7% (44/249) had a PARP. Patients with PARP were significantly younger with a shorter disease course. The majority of patients with PARP (61.4%) was in endoscopic remission. Patients with PARP required more upscaling of medical therapy (81.8% vs. 58.0%, p < 0.01), and more PARP patients underwent colectomy (13.6% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.04). Patients with PARP had a higher median RHI in resection specimens (14 vs. 7, p < 0.01). Conclusion: PARP was present during colonoscopy regardless disease activity and was predominantly found in UC patients with younger age and shorter disease duration. PARP patients had a more severe course of UC, and in case of appendectomy, more severe histopathological appendiceal inflammation. Appendectomy as an experimental therapy for UC has been suggested to be predominantly effective in UC patients with appendiceal inflammation. This study demonstrates that presence of a PARP on colonoscopy predicts appendiceal inflammation. After consensus has been reached on the therapeutic effect of appendectomy, assessing PARP presence during colonoscopy could therefore contribute to identifying patients most likely to respond.

Ileal Pouch-anal Anastomosis Complications and Pouch Failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective: This systematic review aims to assess the incidence of pouch failure and the correlation between ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA)-related complications and pouch failure. Background: Previous studies demonstrated wide variation in postoperative complication rates following IPAA. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies reporting on pouch failure published from January 1, 2010, to May 6, 2020. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model, and the relationship between pouch-related complications and pouch failure was assessed using Spearman's correlations. Results: Thirty studies comprising 22,978 patients were included. Included studies contained heterogenic patient populations, different procedural stages, varying definitions for IPAA-related complications, and different follow-up periods. The pooled pouch failure rate was 7.7% (95% confidence intervals: 5.56-10.59) and 10.3% (95% confidence intervals: 7.24-14.30) for studies with a median follow-up of ≥5 and ≥10 years, respectively. Observed IPAA-related complications were anastomotic leakage (1-17%), pelvic sepsis (2-18%), fistula (1-30%), stricture (1-34%), pouchitis (11-61%), and Crohn's disease of the pouch (0-18%). Pelvic sepsis (r = 0.51, P < 0.05) and fistula (r = 0.63, P < 0.01) were correlated with pouch failure. A sensitivity analysis including studies with a median follow-up of ≥5 years indicated that only fistula was significantly correlated with pouch failure (r = 0.77, P < 0.01). Conclusions: The single long-term determinant of pouch failure was pouch fistula, which is a manifestation of a chronic leak. Therefore, all effort should be taken to prevent an acute leak from becoming a chronic leak by early diagnosis and proactive management of the leak. Mini abstract: This systematic review aims to assess the incidence of pouch failure and the correlation between IPAA-related complications and pouch failure. Long-term pouch failure was correlated with fistula, suggesting that early septic complications may result in fistula formation during long-term follow-up, leading to an increased risk of pouch failure.

Risk Factors and Consequences of Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy for Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Identifying predictors of anastomotic leakage can contribute to prevention of this common complication after esophagectomy. This study identified predictors for anastomotic leakage and assessed the influence of anastomotic leakage on short-term outcomes and long-term survival. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of consecutive patients who underwent esophagectomy in the Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location Amsterdam Medical Center, between 1993 and 2019. Multilevel logistic and Cox regression models were used to assess predictors for anastomotic leakage and survival, and an operation year-level random effects was considered for the unmeasured characteristics at year of operation. RESULTS: Included were 1539 patients, and anastomotic leakage developed in 288 (19%). Predictors for developing anastomotic leakage after a transthoracic esophagectomy were a higher body mass index and a cervical anastomosis. Diabetes mellitus type 2 and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were predictors for anastomotic leakage after a transhiatal esophagectomy. Median intensive care unit and hospital stay was longer for patients with anastomotic leakage than for patients without anastomotic leakage (both P < .001 for transthoracic esophagectomy, P = .010 and P < .001, respectively, for transhiatal esophagectomy). A higher percentage of patients with anastomotic leakage died within 30 days (3.8% vs 1.9%, P = .050). However, anastomotic leakage did not significantly influence long-term survival (hazard ratio, 0.994; 95% CI, 0.849-1.176; P = .994). CONCLUSIONS: Higher body mass index, cervical anastomosis, diabetes mellitus, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are predictors for anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy. Anastomotic leakage is associated with worse short-term outcomes, but long-term survival was not influenced. Future studies should focus on patient optimization, accurate patient selection, and development of tools in risk assessment.