Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36639580›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023

The VACStent trial: combined treatment of esophageal leaks by covered stent and endoscopic vacuum therapy.

J Lange, G Kähler, J Bernhardt, J Knievel, A Dormann, U Hügle, C F Eisenberger, M M Heiss

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Treatment of anastomotic leakage following Ivor Lewis esophagectomy-10 year experience from a Nordic center.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2024
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

J Lange *Department of Abdominal, Tumor, Transplant and Vascular Surgery, Cologne-Merheim Medical Center, University Witten/Herdecke, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Cologne, Germany. langej@kliniken-koeln.de.ORCID 0000-0001-7238-3344
G Kähler *Multispecialty Endoscopy Center, Mannheim Medical Center, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
J BernhardtDepartment of Surgery, Klinikum Suedstadt Rostock, Rostock, Germany.
J KnievelTrials Center, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
A DormannDepartment of Gastroenterology, Cologne-Holweide and Merheim Medical Center, Cologne, Germany.
U HügleDepartment of Gastroenterology, Cologne-Holweide and Merheim Medical Center, Cologne, Germany.
C F EisenbergerDepartment of Abdominal, Tumor, Transplant and Vascular Surgery, Cologne-Merheim Medical Center, University Witten/Herdecke, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Cologne, Germany.
M M HeissDepartment of Abdominal, Tumor, Transplant and Vascular Surgery, Cologne-Merheim Medical Center, University Witten/Herdecke, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndoscopic treatment of esophageal leaks, mostly by covered stents or endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT), has largely improved the clinical outcome in the last decade. However, both techniques suffer from significant limitations. Covered stents are hampered by a high rate of migration and missing functional drainage, whereas endoluminal EVT devices are limited by obstruction of the GI tract. The new design of the VACStent makes it a fully covered stent within a polyurethane sponge cylinder, allowing EVT while stent passage is still open. Initial clinical applications have demonstrated the fundamental concept of the VACStent.

methodA prospective multicenter open-label study was performed with the primary endpoint safe practicality, complete leak coverage, and effective suction-treatment of esophageal leaks. Secondary endpoints were prevention of septic conditions, successful leak healing, and complications, in particular stent-migration, local erosions and bleeding.

resultsFifteen patients with different, mostly postoperative anastomotic leaks were enrolled in three centers. A total of 41 VACStents were implanted. The mean number of VACStents per patient was 2.7, with a mean duration of VACStent treatment of 15 days. The primary endpoint was met in all VACStent applications (41/41 implants), resulting in a leak healing rate of 80% (12/15 patients). Septic episodes were prevented in 93% (14/15 patients) and there was no mortality. There were no severe device-related adverse events (SADE) nor significant local bleeding or erosion. Minor stent-dislocation and migration, respectively, was observed in 7%. Oral intake of liquids or food was documented in 87% (13/15 patients). One anastomotic stenosis was seen during follow-up.

conclusionsVACStent treatment is a safe and effective treatment in esophageal leaks which can be covered by the sponge cylinder. Its application was described as easy and resembling that of conventional GI stents, with an impressive clinical success rate comparable to EVT outcomes. The VACStent offers a new option for clinical treatment of critical situations in esophageal perforations and anastomotic sutureline failures.

Indexed as

Esophageal PerforationNegative-Pressure Wound TherapyAnastomotic LeakEndoscopyEsophagusHemorrhageHumansProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesStentsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID36639580
PMCPMC10156910

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.