Cargando…

Esophageal perforations: one is bad, two is worse

A 48-year-old man was admitted for medical management of recurrent Clostridium difficile (C-dif) colitis. One month prior to presentation, he underwent right thoracotomy and lower lobectomy for a carcinoid tumor at another hospital. His postoperative course was complicated by C-dif colitis, gastroes...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Price, Dustin, Skarupa, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6461139/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31058234
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2018-000206
_version_ 1783410453938962432
author Price, Dustin
Skarupa, David
author_facet Price, Dustin
Skarupa, David
author_sort Price, Dustin
collection PubMed
description A 48-year-old man was admitted for medical management of recurrent Clostridium difficile (C-dif) colitis. One month prior to presentation, he underwent right thoracotomy and lower lobectomy for a carcinoid tumor at another hospital. His postoperative course was complicated by C-dif colitis, gastroesophageal reflux, and epigastric pain. He underwent two esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) procedures demonstrating mild esophagitis on the first procedure, followed by a linear ulcer on the second procedure 2 weeks later. On hospital day 9 of his current admission, he developed an acute abdomen and underwent an urgent exploratory laparotomy for presumed fulminant colitis. Findings included a healthy-appearing colon with only moderate distension, so a loop ileostomy was created for antegrade colonic irrigation. Postoperatively, a chest X-ray demonstrated a tension-appearing left pleural effusion, prompting tube thoracostomy placement. Initial output was greater than 2L of thin dark-brown fluid. An esophagram demonstrated a distal esophageal perforation (EP) and EGD was performed. Two medium-sized EPs were identified which appeared to arise from chronic-appearing ulcerations, one at 39 cm and one at 45 cm from the incisors (figure 1). A single 19mm×100 mm EndoMAXX fully covered stent was placed. Video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) drainage of the left hemithorax was performed in addition to placement of a right tube thoracostomy. Due to continued high output from the left thoracostomy tube, the stent was exchanged for a longer 23mm×100mm EndoMAXX fully covered stent. The patient stabilized for several days but again developed worsened sepsis, with EGD demonstrating inadequate coverage of the proximal perforation. WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE? A. Repeat esophageal stenting with wide drainage of the thoracic cavity. B. Esophageal T-tube placement and wide drainage of the thoracic cavity. C. Esophageal resection with gastrostomy drainage and proximal diversion. D. Bilateral tube thoracostomies and antibiotic/antifungal therapy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6461139
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64611392019-05-03 Esophageal perforations: one is bad, two is worse Price, Dustin Skarupa, David Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Challenges in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery A 48-year-old man was admitted for medical management of recurrent Clostridium difficile (C-dif) colitis. One month prior to presentation, he underwent right thoracotomy and lower lobectomy for a carcinoid tumor at another hospital. His postoperative course was complicated by C-dif colitis, gastroesophageal reflux, and epigastric pain. He underwent two esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) procedures demonstrating mild esophagitis on the first procedure, followed by a linear ulcer on the second procedure 2 weeks later. On hospital day 9 of his current admission, he developed an acute abdomen and underwent an urgent exploratory laparotomy for presumed fulminant colitis. Findings included a healthy-appearing colon with only moderate distension, so a loop ileostomy was created for antegrade colonic irrigation. Postoperatively, a chest X-ray demonstrated a tension-appearing left pleural effusion, prompting tube thoracostomy placement. Initial output was greater than 2L of thin dark-brown fluid. An esophagram demonstrated a distal esophageal perforation (EP) and EGD was performed. Two medium-sized EPs were identified which appeared to arise from chronic-appearing ulcerations, one at 39 cm and one at 45 cm from the incisors (figure 1). A single 19mm×100 mm EndoMAXX fully covered stent was placed. Video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) drainage of the left hemithorax was performed in addition to placement of a right tube thoracostomy. Due to continued high output from the left thoracostomy tube, the stent was exchanged for a longer 23mm×100mm EndoMAXX fully covered stent. The patient stabilized for several days but again developed worsened sepsis, with EGD demonstrating inadequate coverage of the proximal perforation. WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE? A. Repeat esophageal stenting with wide drainage of the thoracic cavity. B. Esophageal T-tube placement and wide drainage of the thoracic cavity. C. Esophageal resection with gastrostomy drainage and proximal diversion. D. Bilateral tube thoracostomies and antibiotic/antifungal therapy. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-03-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6461139/ /pubmed/31058234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2018-000206 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Challenges in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
Price, Dustin
Skarupa, David
Esophageal perforations: one is bad, two is worse
title Esophageal perforations: one is bad, two is worse
title_full Esophageal perforations: one is bad, two is worse
title_fullStr Esophageal perforations: one is bad, two is worse
title_full_unstemmed Esophageal perforations: one is bad, two is worse
title_short Esophageal perforations: one is bad, two is worse
title_sort esophageal perforations: one is bad, two is worse
topic Challenges in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6461139/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31058234
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2018-000206
work_keys_str_mv AT pricedustin esophagealperforationsoneisbadtwoisworse
AT skarupadavid esophagealperforationsoneisbadtwoisworse