Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Endoscopic internal drainage and low negative-pressure endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic leaks after oncologic upper gastrointestinal surgery.
Jung, Carlo Felix Maria; Hallit, Rachel; Müller-Dornieden, Annegret; Calmels, Mélanie; Goere, Diane; Chaput, Ulriikka; Camus, Marine; Gonzalez, Jean Michel; Barthet, Marc; Jacques, Jérémie; Legros, Romain; Barrioz, Thierry; Kück, Fabian; Seif Amir Hosseini, Ali; Ghadimi, Michael; Kunsch, Steffen; Ellenrieder, Volker; Wedi, Edris; Barret, Maximilien.
  • Jung CFM; Department of Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Oncology and Endocrinology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
  • Hallit R; Department of Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Oncology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris and University of Paris, Paris, France.
  • Müller-Dornieden A; Department of General, Visceral and Pediatric Surgery, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
  • Calmels M; Department of Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, University of Paris, Paris, France.
  • Goere D; Department of Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, University of Paris, Paris, France.
  • Chaput U; Department of Gastroenterology, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris and Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
  • Camus M; Department of Gastroenterology, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris and Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
  • Gonzalez JM; Department of Gastroenterology, Hôpital Nord, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Marseille, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France.
  • Barthet M; Department of Gastroenterology, Hôpital Nord, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Marseille, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France.
  • Jacques J; Department of Endoscopy and Gastroenterology, Dupuytren University Hospital, Limoges, France.
  • Legros R; Department of Endoscopy and Gastroenterology, Dupuytren University Hospital, Limoges, France.
  • Barrioz T; Department of Gastroenterology, Poitiers University Hospital, Poitiers, France.
  • Kück F; Department of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
  • Seif Amir Hosseini A; Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
  • Ghadimi M; Department of General, Visceral and Pediatric Surgery, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
  • Kunsch S; Department of Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Oncology and Endocrinology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
  • Ellenrieder V; Department of Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Oncology and Endocrinology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
  • Wedi E; Department of Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Oncology and Endocrinology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
  • Barret M; Department of Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Oncology and Interventional Endoscopy, Sana Klinikum Offenbach, Offenbach, Germany.
Endoscopy ; 54(1): 71-74, 2022 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33506454
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Endoscopic internal drainage (EID) with double-pigtail stents or low negative-pressure endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) are treatment options for leakage after upper gastrointestinal oncologic surgery. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of these techniques.

METHODS:

Between 2016 and 2019, patients treated with EID in five centers in France and with EVT in Göttingen, Germany were included and retrospectively analyzed using univariate analysis. Pigtail stents were changed every 4 weeks; EVT was repeated every 3-4 days until leak closure.

RESULTS:

35 EID and 27 EVT patients were included, with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) leak size of 0.75 cm (0.5-1.5). Overall treatment success was 100 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 90 %-100 %) for EID vs. 85.2 % (95 %CI 66.3 %-95.8 %) for EVT (P = 0.03). The median (IQR) number of endoscopic procedures was 2 (2-3) vs. 3 (2-6.5; P = 0.003) and the median (IQR) treatment duration was 42 days (28-60) vs. 17 days (7.5-28; P < 0.001), for EID vs. EVT, respectively.

CONCLUSION:

EID and EVT provide high closure rates for upper gastrointestinal anastomotic leaks. EVT provides a shorter treatment duration, at the cost of a higher number of procedures.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Terapia de Presión Negativa para Heridas / Fuga Anastomótica Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Terapia de Presión Negativa para Heridas / Fuga Anastomótica Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article