Cargando…
Safety and effectiveness of endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure for esophageal defects: Systematic review and meta-analysis
Background and study aims Esophageal defects (leaks, fistulas, and perforations) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure (EVAC) is a novel intervention that entails the use of sponges in the defect along with negative pressure to achieve granulat...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
2021
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8367451/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34466361 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1508-5947 |
_version_ | 1783739062272655360 |
---|---|
author | Aziz, Muhammad Haghbin, Hossein Sharma, Sachit Weissman, Simcha Saleem, Saad Lee-Smith, Wade Kobeissy, Abdallah Nawras, Ali Alastal, Yaseen |
author_facet | Aziz, Muhammad Haghbin, Hossein Sharma, Sachit Weissman, Simcha Saleem, Saad Lee-Smith, Wade Kobeissy, Abdallah Nawras, Ali Alastal, Yaseen |
author_sort | Aziz, Muhammad |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background and study aims Esophageal defects (leaks, fistulas, and perforations) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure (EVAC) is a novel intervention that entails the use of sponges in the defect along with negative pressure to achieve granulation tissue formation and healing and has been gaining popularity. We performed a systematic review and pooled analysis of available literature to assess the safety and effectiveness of EVAC for esophageal defects. Patients and methods We queried PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science through September 25, 2020 to include all pertinent articles highlighting the safety and effectiveness profile of EVAC for esophageal defects. Pooled rates, 95 % confidence intervals (CIs), and heterogeneity ( I (2) ) were assessed for each outcome. Results A total of 18 studies with 423 patients were included (mean age 64.3 years and males 74.4 %). The technical success for EVAC was 97.1 % (CI: 95.4 %–98.7 %, I (2) = 0 %). The clinical success was 89.4 % (CI: 85.6 %–93.1 %, I (2) = 36.8 %). The overall all-cause mortality and adverse events (AEs) noted were 7.1 % (CI: 4.7 %–9.5 %, I (2) = 0 %) and 13.6 % (CI: 8.0 %–19.1 %, I (2) = 68.9 %), respectively. The pooled need for adjuvant therapy was 15.7 % (CI: 9.8 %–21.6 %, I (2) = 71.1 %). Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis showed high rates of technical success, clinical success, and low all-cause mortality and AEs using EVAC. Although the technique is a promising alternative, the lack of comparative studies poses a challenge in making definite conclusions regarding use of EVAC compared to other endoscopic modalities, such as clips and stents. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8367451 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Georg Thieme Verlag KG |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83674512021-08-30 Safety and effectiveness of endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure for esophageal defects: Systematic review and meta-analysis Aziz, Muhammad Haghbin, Hossein Sharma, Sachit Weissman, Simcha Saleem, Saad Lee-Smith, Wade Kobeissy, Abdallah Nawras, Ali Alastal, Yaseen Endosc Int Open Background and study aims Esophageal defects (leaks, fistulas, and perforations) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure (EVAC) is a novel intervention that entails the use of sponges in the defect along with negative pressure to achieve granulation tissue formation and healing and has been gaining popularity. We performed a systematic review and pooled analysis of available literature to assess the safety and effectiveness of EVAC for esophageal defects. Patients and methods We queried PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science through September 25, 2020 to include all pertinent articles highlighting the safety and effectiveness profile of EVAC for esophageal defects. Pooled rates, 95 % confidence intervals (CIs), and heterogeneity ( I (2) ) were assessed for each outcome. Results A total of 18 studies with 423 patients were included (mean age 64.3 years and males 74.4 %). The technical success for EVAC was 97.1 % (CI: 95.4 %–98.7 %, I (2) = 0 %). The clinical success was 89.4 % (CI: 85.6 %–93.1 %, I (2) = 36.8 %). The overall all-cause mortality and adverse events (AEs) noted were 7.1 % (CI: 4.7 %–9.5 %, I (2) = 0 %) and 13.6 % (CI: 8.0 %–19.1 %, I (2) = 68.9 %), respectively. The pooled need for adjuvant therapy was 15.7 % (CI: 9.8 %–21.6 %, I (2) = 71.1 %). Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis showed high rates of technical success, clinical success, and low all-cause mortality and AEs using EVAC. Although the technique is a promising alternative, the lack of comparative studies poses a challenge in making definite conclusions regarding use of EVAC compared to other endoscopic modalities, such as clips and stents. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2021-08-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8367451/ /pubmed/34466361 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1508-5947 Text en The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Aziz, Muhammad Haghbin, Hossein Sharma, Sachit Weissman, Simcha Saleem, Saad Lee-Smith, Wade Kobeissy, Abdallah Nawras, Ali Alastal, Yaseen Safety and effectiveness of endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure for esophageal defects: Systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Safety and effectiveness of endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure for esophageal defects: Systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Safety and effectiveness of endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure for esophageal defects: Systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Safety and effectiveness of endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure for esophageal defects: Systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Safety and effectiveness of endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure for esophageal defects: Systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Safety and effectiveness of endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure for esophageal defects: Systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | safety and effectiveness of endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure for esophageal defects: systematic review and meta-analysis |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8367451/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34466361 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1508-5947 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT azizmuhammad safetyandeffectivenessofendoluminalvacuumassistedclosureforesophagealdefectssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT haghbinhossein safetyandeffectivenessofendoluminalvacuumassistedclosureforesophagealdefectssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT sharmasachit safetyandeffectivenessofendoluminalvacuumassistedclosureforesophagealdefectssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT weissmansimcha safetyandeffectivenessofendoluminalvacuumassistedclosureforesophagealdefectssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT saleemsaad safetyandeffectivenessofendoluminalvacuumassistedclosureforesophagealdefectssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT leesmithwade safetyandeffectivenessofendoluminalvacuumassistedclosureforesophagealdefectssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT kobeissyabdallah safetyandeffectivenessofendoluminalvacuumassistedclosureforesophagealdefectssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT nawrasali safetyandeffectivenessofendoluminalvacuumassistedclosureforesophagealdefectssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT alastalyaseen safetyandeffectivenessofendoluminalvacuumassistedclosureforesophagealdefectssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |