Esophageal Perforation
Facebook: Happy Friday Knight
February, 2nd, 2018
General Surgical Residency Program
Thailand
• Can be from iatrogenic (most common -
during diagnostic or therapeutic endoscopic
procedures), spontaneous, foreign body,
trauma, operative injury, and tumor.
• Regardless of etiology, it is surgical emergency
• Surgical therapy is mainstay treatment
Basic Anatomy of Esophagus
• A muscular tube
• From pharynx to cardia of stomach
• 3 narrowing points: tend to hold up objects and
injured when ingesting corrosive agent
– Uppermost: entrance of esophagus caused by
cricopharyngeal muscle (1.5 cm)
– Middle: caused by crossing of Lt main stem bronchus
and aortic arch (1.6 cm)
– Lowermost: hiatus caused by sphincter (1.6-1.9 cm)
• In normal anatomic position, transition from
oropharynx to esophagus is lower border of 6th cervical
vertebra
• Attach to cricoid cartilage
• It lies in the midline, with a deviation to the
left in the lower portion of the neck and upper portion
of the thorax, and returns to the midline in the
midportion of the thorax near the bifurcation of the
trachea In the lower portion of the thorax, the
esophagus again deviates to the left and
anteriorly to pass through the diaphragmatic hiatus
Netter’s Atlas of anatomy
Netter’s Atlas of anatomy
Brunicardi FC et al. Schwartz’s Principles of
Surgery. 10th ed. McGraw-Hill Education, 2015
Brunicardi FC et al.
Schwartz’s Principles of
Surgery. 10th ed. McGraw-
Hill Education, 2015
• Cervical portion: 5 cm
• Thoracic portion: 20 cm
• Abdominal portion: 2 cm
• Musculature:
– Outer longitudinal and inner circular layer
– 2 – 6 cm uppermost contains only striated muscle,
then smooth muscle gradually becomes more
abundant
Brunicardi FC et al. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. 10th ed. McGraw-Hill Education, 2015.
Brunicardi FC et al. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. 10th ed. McGraw-Hill Education, 2015.
• Primary function of esophagus is to transport
materials from pharynx to stomach
• Swallowing – three phases: oral, pharyngeal,
esophageal
Yeo CJ et al. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
Clinical Presentation
• Depends on
– the mechanism of injury
– time elapsed from injury
– location of the perforation
– associated comorbid conditions
• Pain
• Fever
• Dyspnea
• crepitus
Clinical Presentation
• Cervical perforation:
– Pain
– Dysphagia
– Odynophagia worsening when swallowing and
neck flexion
– Crepitus
– Fever
– Right-sided pleural effusion
Clinical Presentation
• Midthoracic perforation:
– Fever
– Right-sided pleural effusion
– Substernal and epigastric pain
– Mediastinal air
Clinical Presentation
• In spontaneous perforation of distal thoracic
esophagus (Boerhaave syndrome) : Mackler triad:
– Thoracic pain
– Vomiting
– Subcutaneous emphysema
• Perforation of abdominal portion:
– severe epigastric pain radiate to back and left
shoulder
– Generalized peritonitis suggests diffuse contamination
Diagnosis
• Critical period of 24 hours is essential
• Wide range of diagnostic option can guide the
clinician:
– CXR
– Oral contrast studies
– CT
– Direct endoscope
• Which to choose depends on clinical screnario
Diagnosis
• In stable and cooperative patient  CXR PA
upright with lateral CXR
– Mediastinal emphysema
– Mediastinal widening
– In cervical perforation  subcutaneous
emphysema
http://www.anmjournal.com/article.asp?issn=0331-
3131;year=2015;volume=9;issue=1;spage=30;epage=32;aulast=Nair
Diagnosis
• Stable patient suspected endoscopic injury:
contrast esophagogram
– Standard confirmatory study
– maybe non-operative management
– Most protocols initially utilize water-soluble
iodinated radiopaque medium (Gastrograffin)
followed by dilute barium
https://thoracickey.com/esophageal-perforation/
Diagnosis
• More urgent presentations often come with
CT scan
– Used in atypical presentation, unable to tolerate
oral study, critically ill, intubated
– Good for identify extraluminal air and fluid
Yeo CJ et al. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
Diagnosis
• Next is to do endoscopic assessment
– direct visualization of the esophageal mucosa for
tears, perforations, and pathologic lesions
– useful in assessing the extent of injury and its
location, thus guiding surgical decision making and
operative approach
– Therapeutic benefit in removing foreign body and
placement of stent
– Air insufflation may exacerbate pneumothorax
– Best perform in OR
– ICD before performing
Management
• Principles
– Accurate diagnosis
– Resuscitation
– Control of extraluminal contamination
– Broad spectrum antibiotic coverage – both aerobe
and anaerobe
– NPO and nutritional support
– Restoration of GI tract continuity
Management
• Choices
– Nonoperative management
– Placement of a covered stent
– Primary surgical repair
– Drainage
– Esophageal resection and exclusion or proximal
diversion
Management
• Factors that guide the choice
– location of perforation
– degree of contamination
– sepsis
– Tissue destruction
– preexisting esophageal disease
– comorbidities
– time from the diagnosis
Yeo CJ et al. Shackelford’s surgery of
alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia:
Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
Yeo CJ et al. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
Nonoperative and Endoscopic Managemtn
• Cameron and Altorjay proposed criteria for
nonoperative management:
– Perforation within neck or mediastinum with free
drainage back into the esophagus on
esophagogram
– Minimal symptom without evidence of sepsis
– Early diagnosis of intramural perforation
– Absence of benign or malignant obstructive
disease
Nonoperative and Endoscopic Managemtn
• Observe the patient for 3 – 5 days then repeat
esophagogram and step diet
• Stent can be used to seal perforation and
control a leak but debridement and drainage
must be ensured
Operative Management
• Gold standard
• Best outcomes when early identification (<24h)
• Surgical exploration allows
– direct visualization of the perforation
– drainage of contaminated spaces
– debridement of devitalized tissue
– followed by a primary repair, resection, or diversion if
necessary.
Operative Management
• Cervical esophagus
– Left neck incision
– Anterior to SCM
– Drainage
– 2-layer primary repair
– containment of the cervical esophageal
perforation by the surrounding cervical structures
limits contamination
https://www.ctsnet.org/article/exposure-cervical-esophagus
2 FB below
cricoid cartilage,
horizontally
from anterior to
posterior SCM
https://www.ctsnet.org/article/exposure-cervical-esophagus
- Short
subplastymal
flaps are elevated
- Fascial incised
https://www.ctsnet.org/article/exposure-cervical-esophagus
https://www.ctsnet.org/article/exp
osure-cervical-esophagus
Operative Management
• In contrast, perforation of the thoracic or
abdominal esophagus is associated with
contamination of larger, free spaces (i.e.,
pleura or peritoneum) and therefore requires
a more aggressive surgical approach in order
to obtain source control of the underlying
infection and prevent continued soilage
Operative Management
• Abdominal esophagus: explore laparotomy
• Thoracic esophagus
– Right thoracotomy through 6th ICS for proximal
and middle esophagus
– Left thoracotomy through 8th ICS for distal
esophagus
Operative Management
• Principles: debridement devitalized tissue and
primary closure
• Mucosal repair by interrupted absorbable suture
• Minimize esophageal stricture
• Muscular layer is reapproximated with
interrupted or running suture
• Subsequent coverage with a vascular pedicle,
such as an intercostal muscle flap, and pleural,
pericardial, or omental pedicle allows further
buttressing of a repair and is recommended
whenever feasible
Yeo CJ et al. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
Yeo CJ et al. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
Operative Management
• Any of the antireflux procedures (Belsey Mark
IV, Nissen, Dor, Toupet) may be used to
buttress the repair
• Alternative choices when extensive tissue
necrosis:
– T-tube placement
– stent placement with muscle flap coverage
– esophageal resection with proximal esophageal
diversion and distal feeding access
• In setting of underlying esophageal diseases may
complicate the choice  absolute
contraindications to primary esophageal repair
unless distal obstruction can be relieved :
– Achalasia
– Chronic stricture
– eosinophilic esophagitis
– severe reflux disease
– malignancy
Operative Management
• Achalasia, repaired primarily in two layers,
and esophageal myotomy performed on the
contralateral side of the LES
• end-stage achalasia with sigmoid esophagus,
malignancy, retractory esophageal stricture,
esophagectomy with gastric pull-up
Operative Management
• Esophagectomy with reconstruction VS
proximal diversion and distal enteral access:
– Remain challenging
– judging from the degree of contamination
– the patient’s physiologic status
– suitability of a conduit for esophageal
replacement
Operative Management
References
Brunicardi FC et al. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. 10th ed. McGraw-Hill
Education, 2015.
Yeo CJ et al. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia:
Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
Netter’s Atlas of anatomy
https://www.ctsnet.org/article/exposure-cervical-esophagus

Esophageal perforation

  • 1.
    Esophageal Perforation Facebook: HappyFriday Knight February, 2nd, 2018 General Surgical Residency Program Thailand
  • 2.
    • Can befrom iatrogenic (most common - during diagnostic or therapeutic endoscopic procedures), spontaneous, foreign body, trauma, operative injury, and tumor. • Regardless of etiology, it is surgical emergency • Surgical therapy is mainstay treatment
  • 3.
  • 4.
    • A musculartube • From pharynx to cardia of stomach • 3 narrowing points: tend to hold up objects and injured when ingesting corrosive agent – Uppermost: entrance of esophagus caused by cricopharyngeal muscle (1.5 cm) – Middle: caused by crossing of Lt main stem bronchus and aortic arch (1.6 cm) – Lowermost: hiatus caused by sphincter (1.6-1.9 cm)
  • 5.
    • In normalanatomic position, transition from oropharynx to esophagus is lower border of 6th cervical vertebra • Attach to cricoid cartilage • It lies in the midline, with a deviation to the left in the lower portion of the neck and upper portion of the thorax, and returns to the midline in the midportion of the thorax near the bifurcation of the trachea In the lower portion of the thorax, the esophagus again deviates to the left and anteriorly to pass through the diaphragmatic hiatus
  • 6.
  • 7.
  • 8.
    Brunicardi FC etal. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. 10th ed. McGraw-Hill Education, 2015
  • 9.
    Brunicardi FC etal. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. 10th ed. McGraw- Hill Education, 2015
  • 10.
    • Cervical portion:5 cm • Thoracic portion: 20 cm • Abdominal portion: 2 cm • Musculature: – Outer longitudinal and inner circular layer – 2 – 6 cm uppermost contains only striated muscle, then smooth muscle gradually becomes more abundant
  • 11.
    Brunicardi FC etal. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. 10th ed. McGraw-Hill Education, 2015.
  • 12.
    Brunicardi FC etal. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. 10th ed. McGraw-Hill Education, 2015.
  • 13.
    • Primary functionof esophagus is to transport materials from pharynx to stomach • Swallowing – three phases: oral, pharyngeal, esophageal
  • 14.
    Yeo CJ etal. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
  • 15.
    Clinical Presentation • Dependson – the mechanism of injury – time elapsed from injury – location of the perforation – associated comorbid conditions • Pain • Fever • Dyspnea • crepitus
  • 16.
    Clinical Presentation • Cervicalperforation: – Pain – Dysphagia – Odynophagia worsening when swallowing and neck flexion – Crepitus – Fever – Right-sided pleural effusion
  • 17.
    Clinical Presentation • Midthoracicperforation: – Fever – Right-sided pleural effusion – Substernal and epigastric pain – Mediastinal air
  • 18.
    Clinical Presentation • Inspontaneous perforation of distal thoracic esophagus (Boerhaave syndrome) : Mackler triad: – Thoracic pain – Vomiting – Subcutaneous emphysema • Perforation of abdominal portion: – severe epigastric pain radiate to back and left shoulder – Generalized peritonitis suggests diffuse contamination
  • 19.
    Diagnosis • Critical periodof 24 hours is essential • Wide range of diagnostic option can guide the clinician: – CXR – Oral contrast studies – CT – Direct endoscope • Which to choose depends on clinical screnario
  • 20.
    Diagnosis • In stableand cooperative patient  CXR PA upright with lateral CXR – Mediastinal emphysema – Mediastinal widening – In cervical perforation  subcutaneous emphysema
  • 21.
  • 22.
    Diagnosis • Stable patientsuspected endoscopic injury: contrast esophagogram – Standard confirmatory study – maybe non-operative management – Most protocols initially utilize water-soluble iodinated radiopaque medium (Gastrograffin) followed by dilute barium
  • 23.
  • 24.
    Diagnosis • More urgentpresentations often come with CT scan – Used in atypical presentation, unable to tolerate oral study, critically ill, intubated – Good for identify extraluminal air and fluid
  • 25.
    Yeo CJ etal. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
  • 26.
    Diagnosis • Next isto do endoscopic assessment – direct visualization of the esophageal mucosa for tears, perforations, and pathologic lesions – useful in assessing the extent of injury and its location, thus guiding surgical decision making and operative approach – Therapeutic benefit in removing foreign body and placement of stent – Air insufflation may exacerbate pneumothorax – Best perform in OR – ICD before performing
  • 27.
    Management • Principles – Accuratediagnosis – Resuscitation – Control of extraluminal contamination – Broad spectrum antibiotic coverage – both aerobe and anaerobe – NPO and nutritional support – Restoration of GI tract continuity
  • 28.
    Management • Choices – Nonoperativemanagement – Placement of a covered stent – Primary surgical repair – Drainage – Esophageal resection and exclusion or proximal diversion
  • 29.
    Management • Factors thatguide the choice – location of perforation – degree of contamination – sepsis – Tissue destruction – preexisting esophageal disease – comorbidities – time from the diagnosis
  • 30.
    Yeo CJ etal. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
  • 32.
    Yeo CJ etal. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
  • 33.
    Nonoperative and EndoscopicManagemtn • Cameron and Altorjay proposed criteria for nonoperative management: – Perforation within neck or mediastinum with free drainage back into the esophagus on esophagogram – Minimal symptom without evidence of sepsis – Early diagnosis of intramural perforation – Absence of benign or malignant obstructive disease
  • 34.
    Nonoperative and EndoscopicManagemtn • Observe the patient for 3 – 5 days then repeat esophagogram and step diet • Stent can be used to seal perforation and control a leak but debridement and drainage must be ensured
  • 35.
    Operative Management • Goldstandard • Best outcomes when early identification (<24h) • Surgical exploration allows – direct visualization of the perforation – drainage of contaminated spaces – debridement of devitalized tissue – followed by a primary repair, resection, or diversion if necessary.
  • 36.
    Operative Management • Cervicalesophagus – Left neck incision – Anterior to SCM – Drainage – 2-layer primary repair – containment of the cervical esophageal perforation by the surrounding cervical structures limits contamination
  • 37.
    https://www.ctsnet.org/article/exposure-cervical-esophagus 2 FB below cricoidcartilage, horizontally from anterior to posterior SCM
  • 38.
  • 39.
  • 40.
  • 41.
    Operative Management • Incontrast, perforation of the thoracic or abdominal esophagus is associated with contamination of larger, free spaces (i.e., pleura or peritoneum) and therefore requires a more aggressive surgical approach in order to obtain source control of the underlying infection and prevent continued soilage
  • 42.
    Operative Management • Abdominalesophagus: explore laparotomy • Thoracic esophagus – Right thoracotomy through 6th ICS for proximal and middle esophagus – Left thoracotomy through 8th ICS for distal esophagus
  • 43.
    Operative Management • Principles:debridement devitalized tissue and primary closure • Mucosal repair by interrupted absorbable suture • Minimize esophageal stricture • Muscular layer is reapproximated with interrupted or running suture • Subsequent coverage with a vascular pedicle, such as an intercostal muscle flap, and pleural, pericardial, or omental pedicle allows further buttressing of a repair and is recommended whenever feasible
  • 44.
    Yeo CJ etal. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
  • 45.
    Yeo CJ etal. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013.
  • 46.
    Operative Management • Anyof the antireflux procedures (Belsey Mark IV, Nissen, Dor, Toupet) may be used to buttress the repair • Alternative choices when extensive tissue necrosis: – T-tube placement – stent placement with muscle flap coverage – esophageal resection with proximal esophageal diversion and distal feeding access
  • 47.
    • In settingof underlying esophageal diseases may complicate the choice  absolute contraindications to primary esophageal repair unless distal obstruction can be relieved : – Achalasia – Chronic stricture – eosinophilic esophagitis – severe reflux disease – malignancy Operative Management
  • 48.
    • Achalasia, repairedprimarily in two layers, and esophageal myotomy performed on the contralateral side of the LES • end-stage achalasia with sigmoid esophagus, malignancy, retractory esophageal stricture, esophagectomy with gastric pull-up Operative Management
  • 49.
    • Esophagectomy withreconstruction VS proximal diversion and distal enteral access: – Remain challenging – judging from the degree of contamination – the patient’s physiologic status – suitability of a conduit for esophageal replacement Operative Management
  • 50.
    References Brunicardi FC etal. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. 10th ed. McGraw-Hill Education, 2015. Yeo CJ et al. Shackelford’s surgery of alimentary tract. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2013. Netter’s Atlas of anatomy https://www.ctsnet.org/article/exposure-cervical-esophagus

Editor's Notes

  • #11 Motility disorder ส่วนใหญ่เกิดที่ smooth muscle เลยเกิดที่ lower 2/3
  • #38 2 FB below cricoid cartilage