ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2024
How to preserve the native or reconstructed esophagus after perforations or postoperative leaks: A multidisciplinary 15-year experience.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEsophageal perforation or postoperative leak after esophageal surgery remain a life-threatening condition. The optimal management strategy is still unclear.
aimTo determine clinical outcomes and complications of our 15-year experience in the multidisciplinary management of esophageal perforations and anastomotic leaks.
methodsA retrospective single-center observational study was performed on 60 patients admitted at our department for esophageal perforations or treated for an anastomotic leak developed after esophageal surgery from January 2008 to December 2023. Clinical outcomes were analyzed, and complications were evaluated to investigate the efficacy and safety of our multidisciplinary management based on the preservation of the native or reconstructed esophagus, when feasible.
resultsAmong the whole series of 60 patients, an urgent surgery was required in 8 cases due to a septic state. Fifty-six patients were managed by endoscopic or hybrid treatments, obtaining the resolution of the esophageal leak/perforation without removal of the native or reconstructed esophagus. The mean time to resolution was 54.95 ± 52.64 days, with a median of 35.5 days. No severe complications were recorded. Ten patients out of 56 (17.9%) developed pneumonia that was treated by specific antibiotic therapy, and in 6 cases (10.7%) an atrial fibrillation was recorded. Seven patients (12.5%) developed a stricture within 12 months, requiring one or two endoscopic pneumatic dilations to solve the problem. Mortality was 1.7%.
conclusionA proper multidisciplinary approach with the choice of the most appropriate treatment can be the key for success in managing esophageal leaks or perforations and preserving the esophagus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.