Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28191710

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Fundoplication surgery is a commonly performed procedure for gastro-esophageal reflux disease or hiatal hernia repair. Up to 10% of patients develop persistent postoperative dysphagia after surgery. Data on the effectiveness of pneumatic dilation for treatment are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and identify clinical factors associated with successful response to pneumatic dilation among patients with persistent postfundoplication dysphagia (PPFD). METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients who had undergone pneumatic dilation for PPFD between 1999 and 2016. Patients with dysphagia or achalasia prior to fundoplication were excluded. Demographic information, surgical history, severity of dysphagia, and clinical outcomes were collected. Data pertaining to esophagram, manometry, endoscopy, and pneumatic dilation were also collected. RESULTS: We identified 38 patients (82% female, 95% Caucasian, and median age 59 years) with PPFD who completed pneumatic dilation. The median postfundoplication dysphagia score was 2. Eleven patients had abnormal peristalsis on manometry. Seventeen patients reported response (seven complete) with an average decrease of 1 in their dysphagia score. Fifteen patients underwent reoperation due to PPFD. Hiatal hernia repair was the only factor that predicts a higher response rate to pneumatic dilation. Only one patient in our study developed complication (pneumoperitoneum) from pneumatic dilation. CONCLUSION & INFERENCES: We found that pneumatic dilation to be a safe treatment option for PPFD with moderate efficacy. Patients who developed PPFD after a hiatal hernia repair may gain the greatest benefit after pneumatic dilation. We were not able to identify additional clinical, radiological, endoscopic, or manometric parameters that were predictive of response.


Subject(s)
Deglutition Disorders/etiology , Deglutition Disorders/prevention & control , Esophagus/surgery , Fundoplication/adverse effects , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Dilatation , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Postoperative Complications , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
2.
Endosc Int Open ; 4(11): E1146-E1150, 2016 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27853740

ABSTRACT

Background/aims: The optimal intervention for Boerhaave perforation has not been determined. Options include surgical repair with/without a pedicled muscle flap, T tube placement, esophageal resection or diversion, or an endoscopic approach. All management strategies require adequate drainage and nutritional support. Our aim was to evaluate outcomes following Boerhaave perforation treated with surgery, endoscopic therapy, or both. Patients and methods: We performed a 10-year review of our prospectively maintained databases of adult patients with Boerhaave perforations. We documented clinical presentation, extent of injury, primary intervention, "salvage" treatment (any treatment for persistent leak), and outcome. Results were analyzed using the Fisher's exact and Kruskal - Wallis tests. Results: Between October 2004 and October 2014, 235 patients presented with esophageal leak/fistula with 17 Boerhaave perforations. Median age was 68 years. Median length of perforation was 1.25 cm (range 0.8 - 5 cm). Four patients presented with systemic sepsis (two treated with palliative stent and two surgically). Primary endotherapy was performed for eight (50 %) and primary surgery for eight (50 %) patients. Two endotherapy patients required multiple stents. Median stent duration was 61 days (range 56 - 76). "Salvage" intervention was required in 2/8 (25 %) endotherapy patients and 1/8 (13 %) surgery patient (stent). All patients healed without resection/reconstruction. There were no deaths in the surgically treated group and two in the endotherapy group (stented with palliative intent due to poor systemic condition). Readmission within 30 days occurred in 3/6 of alive endotherapy patients (50 %) and 0/8 surgery patients. Re-intervention within 30 days was required for one endotherapy patient. Conclusion: Endoscopic repair of Boerhaave perforations can be useful in carefully selected patients without evidence of systemic sepsis. Endoscopic therapy such as stenting is particularly valuable as a "salvage" intervention. The benefits of endoscopic therapy and esophageal preservation are offset against an increased risk of readmission in patients primarily treated endoscopically.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...