• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.39 no.5 s.262
• /
• pp.387-393
• /
• 2006

Background: Esophageal perforation is an uncommon problem, but it is associated with high mortality. We performed a retrospective review of patients with instrumental esophageal perforation to assess the outcome of current management techniques. Material and Method: We retrospectively analyzed all cases of instrumental esophageal perforation diagnosed at our hospital from January 1999 through to March 2005. The study group consisted of 12 patients (8 women and 4 men) with a mean age of 48.8 years (range, $21{\sim}83$ years). We reviewed the effects of the surgical or medical treatments in various conditions of patients, such as of various sites of perforation and time delayed after injury. Result: Perforations were due to diagnostic endoscopy (50.0%, 6/12), esophageal bougination for benign stricture (33.3%, 4/12), endoscopic port insertion (8.3%, 1/12), and tracheal intubation (8.3%, 1/12). The perforated sites were thoracic in 7 patients and cervical in 5. The treatment included resection and reconstruction (5 cases), incision and drainage (4 cases), medical treatment (2 cases), and closed thoracostomy drainage only (1 case). Post-operative complications of transient pneumonia and wound infection were developed in 1 patient respectively. Both occurred in two patients with diffuse mediastinal abscess formation. The overall mortality was 8.3% (1/12) in one old patient who was managed medically for cervical esophageal perforation. Conclusion: We concluded that surgical treatment for esophageal perforations was safe and effective whether diagnosed early or lately.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.1-6
• /
• 2003

Currently, atrial septal defect repair has been considered low risk operation duo to the development of open heart surgery Not only the operation itself, but also the cosmetic aspect is now focused. Though many methods exist as minimally invasive cardiac surgery in atrial septal defect repair, some surgeons advocate that right anterolateral thoracotomy is better than the others in the cosmetic aspect and we compared right anterolateral thoracotomy with median sternotomy. Material and Method: From January 1999 to August 2002, 43 patient underwent atrial septal defect repair by one operator, including 15 patients through right anterolateral thoracotomy(group A) and 15 patients through median sternotomy(group B) in Hanyang university Hospital. The data were randomized and operation outcomes were analyzed between these two groups. Result: The mean weight of group A was 38.77$\pm$15.57kg and 38.21$\pm$21.82kg in group B. In group A, mean operation (OP) time was 197.6$\pm$61.40min, mean cardiopulmonary bypass(CPB) time was 48.66$\pm$13.02min and mean fibrillation time or aortic cross clamp(ACC) time was 30$\pm$11.64min. In group B, mean OP time was 212.33$\pm$31.95min, mean CPB time was 55$\pm$12.10min, and mean fibrillation or ACC time was 29.33$\pm$9.04min. There was no significant differences in these two groups. In group A, mean mechanical ventilation time was 3.78$\pm$0.78 hours, mean postoperative ICU stay was 1.2$\pm$0.47 days and mean postoperative hospital stay was 10.20 41.08 days. In group B, mean mechanical ventilation time was 5.95$\pm$3.73 hours, mean post operative ICU stay was 1.41$\pm$0.61 days, and mean postoperative hospital stay was 12.20$\pm$3.55 days. There was no any significant difference in two groups. Group A had significantly lower mean thoracic and pleuropericardial drainage than group B (175.33$\pm$90.54cc vs 352.33$\pm$239.43cc, p<0.05). Complication was seen in one case in group B, transient 2nd degree A-V block. Conclusion: Right anterolateral thoracotomy was better than median sternotomy not only in cosmetic aspect but also in postoperative thoracic and pleuropericardial drainage, using the same instrument(p.0.05). But, right anterolateral thoracotomy was more technically difficult due to narrow operative field and we should be careful of aortic cannulation.