Intensive endoscopic therapy for untreated cervical anastomotic strictures after esophagectomy: a pilot study

Background Cervical anastomotic strictures after esophagectomy cause significant disease burden. We aimed to study the technical feasibility and safety of intensive endoscopic therapy. Methods In this pilot study, we included 15 patients with an untreated benign cervical anastomotic stricture after esophagectomy. Intensive endoscopic therapy comprised three endoscopic modalities: in- and excision using a needle-knife, intralesional steroid injections and bougie dilation. In two endoscopic procedures, the stricture was dilated up to a luminal diameter of 18 mm. Patients were followed up to 6 months. Results A luminal diameter of 18 mm was achieved in 13 of 15 patients (87%) after two endoscopic procedures. No major adverse events related to the investigational treatment occurred. Median dysphagia scores significantly improved from 2 (IQR, interquartile range, 2-3) at baseline to 0 (IQR 0-1) after 14 days (p < 0.001). Eleven (73%) patients developed recurrent symptoms of dysphagia requiring a median of 1 (IQR 0-3) additional endoscopic dilation procedure. Conclusions Achieving a luminal diameter of 18 mm in two procedures with intensive endoscopic therapy was technically feasible and effective in reducing dysphagia rapidly in patients with a cervical anastomotic stricture after esophagectomy. No major adverse events related to the investigational treatment were observed.Cellular mechanisms in basic and clinical gastroenterology and hepatolog

Endoscopic treatment of stenoses and leaks in the gastrointestinal tract:The role of self-expandable metal stents

To determine the role of stent placement for benign esophageal strictures (BES), we studied which strictures poorly respond to standard dilation therapy and whether increasing the target diameter of bougie dilation can further optimize the outcomes of dilation therapy. Hereafter, the clinical outcomes of esophageal stent placement for benign strictures and anastomotic leaks, perforations and fistulas have been analyzed. We found that the clinical success rates of stent placement for benign esophageal leaks, perforations and fistulas widely varied. Therefore a clinical prediction rule was developed to predict the individual probability of successful stent therapy. In addition to the analyses of the outcomes of stent placement, we also addressed the safety of endoscopic stent removal from the esophagus after temporary stent placement. A small subgroup of patients with therapy-resistant benign esophageal strictures (TRBES) does not respond to endoscopic treatment. In this subgroup of patients we studied the clinical outcomes of esophageal self-dilation

Usefulness of radiographic imaging of percutaneously inserted central venous catheters in critically ill infants and children

Perioperative Medicine: Efficacy, Safety and Outcom

Intensive endoscopic therapy for untreated cervical anastomotic strictures after esophagectomy: a pilot study

Background Cervical anastomotic strictures after esophagectomy cause significant disease burden. We aimed to study the technical feasibility and safety of intensive endoscopic therapy. Methods In this pilot study, we included 15 patients with an untreated benign cervical anastomotic stricture after esophagectomy. Intensive endoscopic therapy comprised three endoscopic modalities: in- and excision using a needle-knife, intralesional steroid injections and bougie dilation. In two endoscopic procedures, the stricture was dilated up to a luminal diameter of 18 mm. Patients were followed up to 6 months. Results A luminal diameter of 18 mm was achieved in 13 of 15 patients (87%) after two endoscopic procedures. No major adverse events related to the investigational treatment occurred. Median dysphagia scores significantly improved from 2 (IQR, interquartile range, 2-3) at baseline to 0 (IQR 0-1) after 14 days (p < 0.001). Eleven (73%) patients developed recurrent symptoms of dysphagia requiring a median of 1 (IQR 0-3) additional endoscopic dilation procedure. Conclusions Achieving a luminal diameter of 18 mm in two procedures with intensive endoscopic therapy was technically feasible and effective in reducing dysphagia rapidly in patients with a cervical anastomotic stricture after esophagectomy. No major adverse events related to the investigational treatment were observed

Is stentplaatsing bij linkszijdige maligne colonobstructie veilig?

Item does not contain fulltex

Propensity score-matched analysis of oncological outcome between stent as bridge to surgery and emergency resection in patients with malignant left-sided colonic obstruction

BACKGROUND: Although self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement as bridge to surgery (BTS) in patients with left-sided obstructing colonic cancer has shown promising short-term results, it is used infrequently owing to uncertainty about its oncological safety. This population study compared long-term oncological outcomes between emergency resection and SEMS placement as BTS. METHODS: Through a national collaborative research project, long-term outcome data were collected for all patients who underwent resection for left-sided obstructing colonic cancer between 2009 and 2016 in 75 Dutch hospitals. Patients were identified from the Dutch Colorectal Audit database. SEMS as BTS was compared with emergency resection in the curative setting after 1 : 2 propensity score matching. RESULTS: Some 222 patients who had a stent placed were matched to 444 who underwent emergency resection. The overall SEMS-related perforation rate was 7.7 per cent (17 of 222). Three-year locoregional recurrence rates after SEMS insertion and emergency resection were 11.4 and 13.6 per cent (P = 0.457), disease-free survival rates were 58.8 and 52.6 per cent (P = 0.175), and overall survival rates were 74.0 and 68.3 per cent (P = 0.231), respectively. SEMS placement resulted in significantly fewer permanent stomas (23.9 versus 45.3 per cent; P < 0.001), especially in elderly patients (29.0 versus 57.9 per cent; P < 0.001). For patients in the SEMS group with or without perforation, 3-year locoregional recurrence rates were 18 and 11.0 per cent (P = 0.432), disease-free survival rates were 49 and 59.6 per cent (P = 0.717), and overall survival rates 61 and 75.1 per cent (P = 0.529), respectively. CONCLUSION: Overall, SEMS as BTS seems an oncologically safe alternative to emergency resection with fewer permanent stomas. Nevertheless, the risk of SEMS-related perforation, as well as permanent stoma, might influence shared decision-making for individual patients

Propensity score-matched analysis of oncological outcome between stent as bridge to surgery and emergency resection in patients with malignant left-sided colonic obstruction

Background: Although self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement as bridge to surgery (BTS) in patients with left-sided obstructing colonic cancer has shown promising short-term results, it is used infrequently owing to uncertainty about its oncological safety. This population study compared long-term oncological outcomes between emergency resection and SEMS placement as BTS. Methods: Through a national collaborative research project, long-term outcome data were collected for all patients who underwent resection for left-sided obstructing colonic cancer between 2009 and 2016 in 75 Dutch hospitals. Patients were identified from the Dutch Colorectal Audit database. SEMS as BTS was compared with emergency resection in the curative setting after 1 : 2 propensity score matching. Results: Some 222 patients who had a stent placed were matched to 444 who underwent emergency resection. The overall SEMS-related perforation rate was 7·7 per cent (17 of 222). Three-year locoregional recurrence rates after SEMS insertion and emergency resection were 11·4 and 13·6 per cent (P = 0·457), disease-free survival rates were 58·8 and 52·6 per cent (P = 0·175), and overall survival rates were 74·0 and 68·3 per cent (P = 0·231), respectively. SEMS placement resulted in significantly fewer permanent stomas (23·9 versus 45·3 per cent; P < 0·001), especially in elderly patients (29·0 versus 57·9 per cent; P < 0·001). For patients in the SEMS group with or without perforation, 3-year locoregional recurrence rates were 18 and 11·0 per cent (P = 0·432), disease-free survival rates were 49 and 59·6 per cent (P = 0·717), and overall survival rates 61 and 75·1 per cent (P = 0·529), respectively. Conclusion: Overall, SEMS as BTS seems an oncologically safe alternative to emergency resection with fewer permanent stomas. Nevertheless, the risk of SEMS-related perforation, as well as permanent stoma, might influence shared decision-making for individual patients

Decompressing Stoma a s Bridge to Elective Surgery is an Effective Strategy for Left-sided Obstructive Colon Cancer: A National, Propensity-score Matched Study

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this population-based study was to compare decompressing stoma (DS) as bridge to surgery (BTS) with emergency resection (ER) for left-sided obstructive colon cancer (LSOCC) using propensity-score matching. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Recently, an increased use of DS as BTS for LSOCC has been observed in the Netherlands. Unfortunately, good quality comparative analyses with ER are scarce. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with nonlocally advanced LSOCC between 2009 and 2016 in 75 Dutch hospitals, who underwent DS or ER in the curative setting, were propensity-score matched in a 1:2 ratio. The primary outcome measure was 90-day mortality, and main secondary outcomes were 3-year overall survival and permanent stoma rate. RESULTS: Of 2048 eligible patients, 236 patients who underwent DS were matched with 472 patients undergoing ER. After DS, more laparoscopic resections were performed (56.8% vs 9.2%, P &lt; 0.001) and more primary anastomoses were constructed (88.5% vs 40.7%, P &lt; 0.001). DS resulted in significantly lower 90-day mortality compared to ER (1.7% vs 7.2%, P = 0.006), and this effect could be mainly attributed to the subgroup of patients over 70 years (3.5% vs 13.7%, P = 0.027). Patients treated with DS as BTS had better 3-year overall survival (79.4% vs 73.3%, hazard ratio 0.36, 95% confidence interval 0.20-0.65) and fewer permanent stomas (23.4% vs 42.4%, P &lt; 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide propensity-score matched study, DS as a BTS for LSOCC was associated with lower 90-day mortality and better 3-year overall survival compared to ER, especially in patients over 70 years of age