Observational studySurgical endoscopy2026
Endoluminal vacuum therapy for upper gastrointestinal leaks: safe, effective and minimally invasive - insights from a retrospective observational study.
Observational study in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An Uncommon Adverse Event of Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy and Pigtail Stent Placement for the Treatment of Bariatric Surgery Leak.ACG case reports journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUpper gastrointestinal (UGI) leaks are serious complications with high morbidity and mortality. Endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVT) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to surgical management, offering promising outcomes. However, EVT remains a non-standardized technique and data regarding its effectiveness remain heterogeneous.
methodswe conducted an observational, retrospective, single-center study from the cohort of patients with UGI leaks treated with EVT at Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón between January 2019 and December 2024. Patient demographics, leak etiology, EVT technical details, complications, and outcomes were analyzed. Overall analysis of the sample and subgroups analysis regarding the leak etiology were conducted. The primary endpoint was leak resolution. Secondary endpoints included morbidity and mortality, number of sponge exchanges, duration of therapy and need for additional interventions.
results30 patients were included; 19 (63.3%) esophaguectomy-associated leaks, 1 (3.3%) esophagueal iatrogenic perforation, 3 (10.0%) gastrectomy-associated leaks and 7 (23.3%) sleeve gastrectomy-associated leaks. EVT achieved leak closure in 27/30 patients (90.0%), combined with endoscopic consolidation therapy in 55%, with a median of 5 (3.0-6.0) sponge exchanges and a median healing time of 30 (18.0-41.0) days. EVT was applied intracavitary in 66.7% in a median time of 1 (0.0-6.0) day since the leak diagnosis and complications occurred in 5/30 (16.6%), all minor. Subgroup analysis revealed a higher success rates and faster recovery in leaks after gastrectomy and esophagectomy. Median hospital stay was 46 (35.0-71.0) days and there was no mortality related to the leak.
conclusionsour sample analysis revealed EVT as an effective and safe therapeutic option for managing UGI leaks, with high success rates and low morbidity. Nevertheless, its combined use with endoscopic consolidation therapy may enhance outcomes. Given the limitations of our study, further prospective, multicenter studies are needed to extrapolate our findings and contribute to standardize EVT indications, implementation, and patient selection criteria.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41233644What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.