Laparoscopic transhiatal suture and gastric valve as a safe and feasible treatment for Boerhaave's syndrome: an Italian single center case series study.

BACKGROUND: Boerhaave's syndrome (BS) is a rare life-threating condition with poor prognosis. Unfortunately, due to its very low incidence, no clear evidences or definitive guidelines are currently available: in detail, surgical strategy is still a matter of debate. Most of the case series reports thoracic approach as the most widely used; conversely, transhiatal abdominal management is just described in sporadic case reports. In our center, the laparoscopic approach has been adopted for years: in the present study, we aim to show his feasibility by reporting the outcomes of the largest clinical series available to date. METHODS: Clinical records of patients admitted for BS to the General and Upper GI Surgery Division of Verona from February 2014 to December 2019 were retrospectively collected. Clinico-pathological characteristics, preoperative workup, surgical management, and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Seven patients were admitted; epigastric/thoracic pain and vomiting were the most frequent symptoms at diagnosis. Laboratory findings were not specific; conversely, radiological imaging always revealed abnormal findings: particularly, CT had excellent sensitivity in detecting signs of esophageal perforation. All but one case had diagnostic workup and received surgery within 24 h. Every patient had laparoscopic transhiatal direct suture and gastric valve; 2 patients (28.6%) also needed a thoracoscopic toilette. Postoperative complications occurred in 4 patients (57%), but in only two of them (29%), the complication was severe according to Clavien-Dindo classification (both received thoracentesis or thoracic drainage for pleural effusion). Of note, no cases of postoperative esophageal leak were recorded. Postoperative mortality was 14% due to one patient who died for cardiovascular complications. Most of the patients (71.4%) were admitted to ICU after surgery (average length, 8.8 days); mean hospital stay was 14.7 days. No patients had readmissions. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the largest case series reporting laparoscopic management of BS. We show that laparoscopy is a safe and feasible approach associated with a shorter length of hospital stay when compared with clinical series in which thoracic approach had been chosen. Of note, laparoscopic management would be easily adopted by surgical centers treating benign gastro-esophageal junction entailing a proper management more widely.

Perianastomotic drainage in Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy, does habit affect utility? An 11-year single-center experience.

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a deadly complication after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. The use of an anastomotic drainage (AD), to diagnose and to potentially treat the leakage, is still a widespread practice. At present, scientific literature is lacking in this topic and its use is based on each center experience. We performed a retrospective analysis of 239 consecutive patients who underwent an Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in our Department from 01/01/2006 to 31/12/2017. Until 28/02/2014, a transthoracic anastomotic drainage was routinely placed in 119 patients (anastomotic-drain group). Drainage removal was planned on POD 5 after the resume of oral intake. In the remaining 120 cases, no drainage was placed (no anastomotic-drain group). We compared the two groups to assess whether the anastomotic drainage had an impact on the timing of the anastomotic leakage diagnosis and treatment. In our series, we observed 9 anastomotic leaks in the first group (7.6%) and 3 in the second one (2.5%). In the anastomotic-drain group, median time for leak diagnosis was 10 days, and notably, in seven cases, the anastomotic drainage was already removed. Considering all the patients who experienced an AL, a re-operation was mandatory in one case, while endoscopic treatment was chosen for five cases and conservative treatment was adopted in three cases. The median hospital length of stay in these patients was 31 days. In the no anastomotic-drain group, one patient with anastomotic leakage was treated conservatively and discharged after 34 days. The other two cases were re-operated and an esophageal prosthesis was placed in both cases, and these patients were discharged, respectively, on POD 28 and POD 38. Concluding, the role of the anastomotic drain in Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy is still unclear. There is a shortage of the literature on this topic and our experience shows that the anastomotic drain has a limited sensibility in AL diagnosis and cannot replace the clinical signs and symptoms. Moreover, the drain it is often removed before the leakage becomes visible. In selected patients with a less severe leak, the anastomotic drain can be an effective treatment, but often a percutaneous drainage, it is an effective alternative choice. In severe dehiscence with sepsis, a reoperation remains the mainstay to control the mediastinal contamination and to eventually treat the leakage.