Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) in the management of oesophageal perforations and post-operative leaks.

INTRODUCTION: Oesophageal perforations and post-oesophagectomy anastomotic leaks are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) is a novel treatment strategy with the potential to promote healing and ameliorate sepsis. Only two cases of its use have been reported in the UK in the management of oesophageal wall defects, representing a limited aetiological and demographic spectrum. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From May to December 2019, 7 patients aged 27-85 years underwent EVT for disparate oesophageal wall defects. Data regarding technical success and feasibility were analysed. RESULTS: Complete defect resolution was achieved in six cases (86%), requiring median of 13 days of treatment (range 6-23), and necessitating three replacement procedures (range 1-4). Significant improvement in C-reactive protein was achieved in all patients undergoing treatment (p = .015). No severe complications occurred that resulted directly from sponge placement, however two individuals (33%) developed oesophageal stricture necessitating endoscopic balloon dilatation, and one died whilst undergoing treatment. CONCLUSION: In selected patients EVT is a safe, valuable tool for the management of a spectrum of oesophageal wall defects, with the potential to reduce associated morbidity and mortality. While this work significantly expands upon the UK reported experience of EVT, we outline the requirement for a national, prospective registry of EVT use in oesophageal leaks and perforations. ABBREVIATIONS: AL: anastomotic leak; CRP: C-reactive protein; CT: computed tomography; EVT: endoscopic vacuum therapy; HES: hospital episode statistics; OGD: oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy; SEMS: oesophageal stenting with self-expanding stents; UK: United Kingdom.

Rates of Bile Acid Diarrhoea After Cholecystectomy: A Multicentre Audit.

INTRODUCTION: Bile acid diarrhoea (BAD) can occur due to disruption to the enterohepatic circulation, e.g. following cholecystectomy. Post-cholecystectomy diarrhoea has been reported in 2.1-57.2% of patients; however, this is not necessarily due to BAD. The aim of this study was to determine the rates of bile acid diarrhoea diagnosis after cholecystectomy and to consider investigation practices. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of electronic databases from five large centres detailing patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy between 2013 and 2017 was cross-referenced with a list of patients who underwent 75SeHCAT testing. A 7-day retention time of <15% was deemed to be positive. Patient demographics and time from surgery to investigation were collected and compared for significance (p < 0.05). RESULTS: A total of 9439 patients underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2017 in the five centres. In total, 202 patients (2.1%) underwent investigation for diarrhoea via 75SeHCAT, of which 64 patients (31.6%) had a 75SeHCAT test result of >15%, while 62.8% of those investigated were diagnosed with bile acid diarrhoea (BAD). In total, 133 (65.8%) patients also underwent endoscopy and 74 (36.6%) patients had a CT scan. Median time from surgery to 75SeHCAT test was 672 days (SD ± 482 days). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Only a small proportion of patients, post-cholecystectomy, were investigated for diarrhoea with significant time delay to diagnosis. The true prevalence of BAD after cholecystectomy may be much higher, and clinicians need to have an increased awareness of this condition due to its amenability to treatment. 75SeHCAT is a useful tool for diagnosis of bile acid diarrhoea.