Cargando…

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for in- and outpatient treatment of colorectal defects

BACKGROUND: Evidence for endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) for colorectal defects is still based on small patient series from various institutions, employing different treatment algorithms and methods. As EVT was invented at our institution 20 years ago, the aim was to report the efficacy and safety o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kühn, Florian, Wirth, Ulrich, Zimmermann, Julia, Beger, Nicola, Hasenhütl, Sandro M., Drefs, Moritz, Heiliger, Christian, Burian, Maria, Werner, Jens, Schiergens, Tobias S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8599392/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33259019
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-08172-5
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Evidence for endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) for colorectal defects is still based on small patient series from various institutions, employing different treatment algorithms and methods. As EVT was invented at our institution 20 years ago, the aim was to report the efficacy and safety of EVT for colorectal defects as well as to analyze factors associated with efficacy, therapy duration, and outpatient treatment. METHODS: Cohort study with analysis of prospectively collected data of patients receiving EVT for colorectal defects at a tertiary referral center in Germany (n = 281). RESULTS: The majority of patients had malignant disease (83%) and an American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of III/IV (81%). Most frequent indications for EVT were anastomotic leakage after sigmoid or rectal resection (67%) followed by rectal stump leakage (20%). EVT was successful in 256 out of 281 patients (91%). EVT following multi-visceral resection (P = 0.037) and recent surgical revision after primary surgery (P = 0.009) were risk factors for EVT failure. EVT-associated adverse events occurred in 27 patients (10%). Median treatment duration was 25 days. Previous chemo-radiation (P = 0.006) was associated with a significant longer duration of EVT. Outpatient treatment was conducted in 49% of patients with a median hospital stay reduction of 15 days and 98% treatment success. Younger patient age (P = 0.044) was associated with the possibility of outpatient treatment. Restoration of intestinal continuity was achieved in 60% of patients where technically possible with a 12-month rate of 52%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with colorectal defects, EVT appears to be a safe and effective, minimally invasive option for in- and outpatient treatment.