RSS-Feed abonnieren
DOI: 10.1055/a-1990-0392
Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure therapy for leakage of the lower gastrointestinal tract: multicenter experiences
Abstract
Background and study aims Only a few studies are available regarding endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure (E-VAC) therapy for the post-surgery leakage of the lower gastrointestinal tract.
Patients and methods In this multicenter German study, we retrospectively analyzed patients treated with E-VAC therapy due to post-surgery leakage of the lower gastrointestinal tract from 2000–2020 at Hannover Medical School, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, and Robert Koch Hospital Gehrden.
Results Overall, 147 patients were included in this study. Most patients had undergone tumor resections of the lower gastrointestinal tract (n = 88; 59.9 %). Median time to diagnosis of leakage was 10 days (interquartile range [IQR] 6–19). Median duration of E-VAC therapy was 14 days (IQR 8–27). Increase of C-reactive protein (CRP) levels significantly correlated with first diagnosis of leakage (P < 0.001). E-VAC therapy led to closure or complete epithelialization of leakage in the majority of patients (n = 122; 83.0 %) and stoma reversal was achieved in 60.0 %. Stoma reversal was significantly more often achieved in patients with CRP levels ≤ 100 mg/L at first diagnosis compared to patients with CRP levels > 100 mg/L (78.4 % vs. 52.7 %; P = 0.012). Odds ratio for failure of stoma reversal was 3.36 in cases with CRP values > 100 mg/L (P = 0.017). In total, leakage- and/ or E-VAC therapy-associated complications occurred in 26 patients (17.7 %). Minor complications included recurrent E-VAC dislocations and subsequent stenosis. Overall, 14 leakage- or E-VAC-associated deaths were observed most often due to sepsis.
Conclusions E-VAC therapy due to post-surgery leakage of the lower gastrointestinal tract is safe and effective. High levels of CRP are a negative predictor of E-VAC therapy success.
Publikationsverlauf
Eingereicht: 16. Februar 2022
Angenommen nach Revision: 29. September 2022
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
23. Februar 2023
© 2023. 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/)
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References
- 1 Lee WS, Yun SH, Roh YN. et al. Risk factors and clinical outcome for anastomotic leakage after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. World J Surg 2008; 32: 1124-1129
- 2 Glitsch A, von Bernstorff W, Seltrecht U. et al. Endoscopic transanal vacuum-assisted rectal drainage (ETVARD): an optimized therapy for major leaks from extraperitoneal rectal anastomoses. Endoscopy 2008; 40: 192-199
- 3 Nagell CF, Holte K. Treatment of anastomotic leakage after rectal resection with transrectal vacuum-assisted drainage (VAC). A method for rapid control of pelvic sepsis and healing. Int J Colorectal Dis 2006; 21: 657-660
- 4 Jimenez-Rodriguez RM, Araujo-Miguez A, Sobrino-Rodriguez S. et al. A new perspective on vacuum-assisted closure for the treatment of anastomotic leak following low anterior resection for rectal cancer: Is it worthy?. Surg Innov 2018; 25: 350-356
- 5 Weidenhagen R, Gruetzner KU, Wiecken T. et al. Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure of anastomotic leakage following anterior resection of the rectum: a new method. Surg Endosc 2008; 22: 1818-1825
- 6 Sharp G, Steffens D, Koh CE. Evidence of negative pressure therapy for anastomotic leak: a systematic review. ANZ J Surg 2021; 91: 537-545
- 7 Loske G, Müller CT. Tips and tricks for endoscopic negative pressure therapy. Chirurg 2019; 90: 7-14
- 8 Kühn F, Wirth U, Zimmermann J. et al. Endoscopic vacuum therapy for in- and outpatient treatment of colorectal defects. Surg Endosc 2021; 35: 6687-6695
- 9 Brangewitz M, Voigtländer T, Helfritz FA. et al. Endoscopic closure of esophageal intrathoracic leaks: stent versus endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure, a retrospective analysis. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 433-438
- 10 Book T, Wortmann N, Winkler M. et al. Endoscopic vacuum assisted closure (E-VAC) of upper gastrointestinal leakages. Scand J Gastro 2021; 56: 1376-1379
- 11 Vignali A, De Nardi P. Endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy to treat rectal anastomotic leakage: A critical analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2022; 14: 1394-1404
- 12 Warps AK, Tollenaar RAEM, Tanis PJ. et al. Time-interval between rectal cancer resection and reintervention for anastomotic leakage and the impact of a defunctioning stoma: a Dutch population-based study. Colorectal Dis 2021; 23: 2937-2947
- 13 Kühn F, Schardey J, Wirth U. et al. Endoscopic vacuum therapy for the treatment of colorectal leaks – a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 2022; 37: 283-292
- 14 Kumar A. Optimizing antimicrobial therapy in sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Clin 2009; 25: 733-51
- 15 Vincent JL, Donadello K, Schmit X. Biomarkers in the critically ill patient: C-reactive protein. Crit Care Clin 2011; 27: 241-251
- 16 Diers J, Wagner J, Baum P. et al. Nationwide in-hospital mortality rate following rectal resection for rectal cancer according to annual hospital volume in Germany. BJS Open 2020; 4: 310-319