ArticleiGIE : innovation, investigation and insights2024
Endoscopic treatment of nonoperable large postsurgical esophageal fistulas: retrospective analysis of a single tertiary center cohort.
Article in iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background and Aims: Anastomotic fistulas are a frequent and dreaded adverse event of esophagectomy. Endoscopic therapy using different techniques is now a well-established first-line treatment option. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of such endoscopic treatments in patients not fit for surgical reintervention and particularly in cases of major tissue defects of >10 mm. Methods: Fifty-seven patients with postoperative large esophageal fistulas who were not considered for surgical reintervention were retrospectively analyzed after undergoing treatment with different endoscopic techniques in a single tertiary center. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the technical and clinical efficacy of endoscopic treatments of those fistulas. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the endoscopic treatment-related adverse events. Results: In 94.7% of patients (n = 54), the intervention was effectively carried out from a technical point of view. In 77.2% of patients (n = 44), treatment led to successful complete closure of the fistula. If we consider the 54 patients in whom technical success was reached, in 75.9% of them (n = 41), clinical success with complete closure of the fistula was achieved. Minor adverse events related to the procedure occurred in 26.32% of patients (n = 15) and major adverse events in 8.8% (n = 5). The mortality rate related to the procedure was 3.5% (n = 2). Conclusions: Endoscopic treatment is a technically achievable, highly effective way of treating postoperative large esophageal fistulas in patients who were not considered fit for surgical treatment, including major defects of >10 mm. It allows patients with a high risk of rapid deterioration to safely recover from their condition, avoiding severe and fatal adverse events without having to resort to debilitating surgical treatment.
Identifiers
What 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.