• Korean Journal of Bronchoesophagology
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.231-234
• /
• 1998

Esophageal perforation is uncommon, however, due to the lack of serosa layer inflammation spread is rapid and common to neighboring structures, leading to significant mortality and morbidity. With an advancement of endoscopic diagnosis there is an increase of esophageal injury and perforation due to esophageal endoscopic procedure. The authors have recently experienced three cases of iatrogenic esophageal perforation following diagnostic endoscopic procedure of the esophagus. We summarize the pervention, diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for iatrogenic perforation.

• Korean Journal of Bronchoesophagology
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.28-34
• /
• 2004

Background : Esophageal perforation due to a traumatic endoscopy or intubation is exceedingly rare. If riot noticed immediately or treated promptly, however, the morbidity and mortality is significant. We performed a retrospective review of patients with iatrogenic hypopharyngo-esophageal perforation to assess the outcome of current management techniques. Material and Methods : We retrospectively analyzed all cases iatrogenic hypopharyngo-esophageal perforation diagnosed at our hospital from January, 1999, through April, 2004. The study group consisted of 11 patients (4 men) with a mean age of 47.6 years (range, 21-83 yr). We reviewed the 11 patients with perforated injuries of the hypopharynx or esophagus during the diagnostic or therapeutic procedures. Result: Perforations were due to diagnostic gastroscopy ($54.5\%$, 6/11), esophageal dilation ($27.3\%$, 3/11), endoscopic port insertion ($9.1\%$, l/11), and tracheal intrathoracic ($9.1\%$, 1/11). Seven patients had intrathoracic and 4 had cervical perforations. Treatment included incision and drainage (5), resection and reconstruction (4), drainage only (1), and observation (2). Nonfatal complications included transient pneumonia (1), and wound infection (1). They occurred in advanced mediastinal abscess ]patients. Mortality was $9.1\%$ (1/11) in old patient who managed medically in cervical esophageal perforation. Conclusions : Current mortality rates in iatrogenic esophageal perforation were improved compared to previous published rates of $19\%\;to\;66\%$ for all patients with this condition. We concluded that aggressive and definitive surgery for thoracic esophageal perforations improving the survival rate, whether diagnosed early or late.

• Korean Journal of Bronchoesophagology
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.30-35
• /
• 1999

Between 1994 to 1998, 7 patients had taken emergency operations by iatrogenic esophageal perforation. To evaluate patterns of injury, clinical presentation, and treatment options for patients, we reviewed all the 7 patients who had gotten transmural injury to the esophagus during dilatations or stenting procedures at our hospital. The primary diagnosis of the patients were as followings , two were achalagia and remaining five were corrosive esophageal strictures. Chest pain, fever, tachycardia were the early signs after esophageal perforation. The sites of perforation were thoracic esophagus in all cases and all of them underwent operation within 8 hours of initial injury. There were no postoperative mortality. Complications were developed three cases： stricture of anastomotic site, mediastinitis due to graft failure of colon and pleural empyema.

• Korean Journal of Bronchoesophagology
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.44-48
• /
• 2003

Rupture of the esophagus is an uncommon condition that can be a formidable challenge to treat. Unless early treatment is applied, life-threatening complications, such as mediastinitis, sepsis, occurs and continue to be associated with a mortality rate of more than 20%. Definitive repair of esophageal perforation is considered the preferred treatment in the past. In the present study, conservative treatment acquired a good results by help of the development of antibiotics and nutritional supportive methods. Iatrogenic causes constituted most of the injuries, followed by external trauma, spontaneous, ingested foreign bodies, and malignancy. The incidence of perforation following ingestion of foreign bodies is very rare, so recommendations regarding treatment remain controversial. We analyzed the course of 31 patients with esophageal perforation by foreign bodies, concentrating on the diagnostic & treatment delay and methods of treatment, complications.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.51-54
• /
• 2003

This patient was an 53-year-old man who had undergone Sengstaken-Blackmore tube insertion for esophageal varix bleeding. Two days after Sengstaken-Blackmore tube insertion, he developed severe left hemothorax and was transferred to our hospital. The esophagoscopic findings revealed a large perforation lengthening 8-cm in the intrathoracic esophagus. A left thoracotomy was performed 33 days after the injury due to repeated varix bleedings and poor conditions. An 8-cm longitudinal perforation of the intrathoracic esophagus with gross suppurative empyema was found. Primary repair and esophageal exclusion was performed 2cm proximal and distal to the perforation, using rows of nonabsorbable staplers(TA stapler 60 $\times$ 4.8) and large bore thoracostomy tubes were placed for local drainage. Six days after intrathoracic esophageal exclusion, an esophagogram revealed a leakage at just above the proximal stapling site. A cervical esophageal exclusion was performed using the same method. One hundred thirty seven days after exclusion operation for the intra-thoracic esophageal perforation, the patient was able to eat per orally without any secondary esophageal reconstructive surgery.

• Neonatal Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.387-390
• /
• 2011

Spontaneous neonatal esophageal perforation (EP) is a rare condition. However, iatrogenic EP due to a feeding tube is not uncommon, particularly in premature infants. Iatrogenic EP can result in serious complications, such as a pneumothorax, and can be fatal. Usually a pneumothorax develops as a result of EP. However, we experienced an EP in a patient with a pneumothorax. The EP occurred after inserting a feeding tube while the patient was suffering from a pneumothorax. Thus care is needed when inserting the feeding tube in a patient with a pneumothorax.

• Proceedings of the KOR-BRONCHOESO Conference
• /
• 2004.09a
• /
• pp.23-23
• /
• 2004

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.26 no.8
• /
• pp.633-637
• /
• 1993

Twenty-five patients with perforation of esophagus were managed at Pusan National University Hospital, from 1981 to 1993. The hospital course of 14 of these patients was evaluated with a special emphasis on the cause and location of perforation, clinical presentation, time elapsed from perforation to treatment, method of treatment, and outcome. Patients with anastomotic leak and cancer were excluded.The perforation was iatrogenic in 7 patients, spontaneous in 5, ingestion of foreign body in 1, and traumatic in 1. There were 7 cervical perforations, 2 upper thoracic perforations, and 5 lower thoracic perforations. Chest pain, fever, and dyspnea were frequent symptoms. Esophagography was most diagnostic [11 patients] but thoracentesis was of little diagnostic aid.Antibiotics were administered intravenously to all patients:hyperalimentation was accomplished intravenously in 11, and nasogastric suction was used in all cases. No patient required any surgical procedure, minor or major.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.39 no.3 s.260
• /
• pp.214-219
• /
• 2006

Background: Perforation of esophagus is relatively uncommon. but it is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Treatment and outcome are largely determined by the time of presentation. We performed a retrospective review of patients with esophageal perforation to assess the outcome of current management techniques. Material and Method: A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients treated for perforation of esophagus from March 1990 to March 2005. There were 28 patients (22 men and 6 women: mean age 51 years, range 17 to 82 years) The causes of the perforations were as follows: foreign body retention (9 patients), trauma (7 patients), spontaneous rupture (7 patients), and iatrogenic (5 pati-ients). 18 patients were presented within 24 hours and 10 patients were presented after 24 hours., Esophageal repair was performed in 21 ($75\%$) of them, 4 patients were treated with esophagectomy, 3 patients were treated with feeding gastrostomy and drainage. Result: Hospital mortality was $18\%$ and iatrogenic was increase the mortality rate (p < 0.05). Site of perforation, time from perforation, and treatment method had no influence on mortality. Postoprative leaks occurred in 4 patients after primary repair and were treated conservatively. Conclusion: Esophageal perforation remains a devastating event which is difficult to diagnose and manage. Primary repair can be performed in most patients with esophageal perforation regardless of time to presentation with a low mortality. Accurate diagnosis and early treatment are essential to the successful management of patients.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.39 no.2 s.259
• /
• pp.111-116
• /
• 2006

Background: Perforation of the esophagus is a deadly injury that requires expert management for survival. The mediastinal contamination with microorganisms, gastric acid, and digestive enzymes results in a mediastinitis that is often fatal if untreated. Material and Method: Between January 1990 and June 2004, 38 patients with esophageal perforation were treated in our hospital. Retrospective review of these cases has been performed. Result: There were 28 males and 10 females. The mean age was 43.84$\pm$18.89 years (range $1{\~}73$ years). Spontaneous rupture was found in $34\%$ of perforations, iatrogenic perforation in $32\%$ and traumatic perforation in $34\%$. Perforation occurred in the cervical esophagus in 8 cases, thoracic esophagus in 29 and abdominal esophagus in 1. In the cervical esophageal perforation, managements were primary closure in 8 and drainage in 2. In the thoracic esophageal perforation, managements were primary closure in 14, resection in 3 and conservative management in 12. The mortality rate was $25\%$ in cervical esophageal perforation and $34.5\%$ in thoracic esophageal perforation. We revealed risk factor of esophageal perforation to be peropertaive septic condition (p=0.005). Conclusion: Most important risk factor of esophageal perforation was preoperative septic condition. Preoperative prompt and aggressive preoperative treatment may improve the survival rate of esophageal perforation.