Long free interval before treatment does not preclude primary esophageal repair in Boerhaave's syndrome. Esophageal exclusion may be more often than not avoided in most cases.
Prompt recognition of the diagnosis of oesophageal perforation and rapid institution of supportive measures, followed by an appropriate, patient specific treatment option optimises the chance of a successful outcome. The wide range of presentation of oesophageal perforation necessitates individualisation of treatment.
ObjectivesConventional spinal cord stimulation (SCS) delivers a tonic waveform with consistent stream of pulses; burst delivers groups of pulses separated by short pulse‐free periods. The current study compared the short‐term safety and efficacy of burst with tonic stimulation in subjects already receiving SCS.Materials and MethodsAt 4 IRB‐approved sites, 22 subjects previously implanted with an SCS device for intractable, chronic pain gave informed consent and received burst stimulation for 14 days. Subjects reported average daily Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for overall, trunk, and limb pain using tonic stimulation and after 7 and 14 days of burst stimulation. Thoughts about pain were assessed using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale. Areas of paresthesia were assessed during tonic and burst stimulation using body maps. Assessment of patient satisfaction and preferred stimulation occurred after 14 days of burst.ResultsAverage daily overall VAS reduced 46% from a mean of 53.5 (±20.2) mm during tonic SCS to 28.5 (±18.1) mm during burst (p < 0.001); trunk and limb VAS scores were also reduced by 33% and 51%, respectively. During burst, 16 subjects (73%) reported no paresthesia, 5 (23%) reported a reduction, and 1 (4%) reported increased paresthesia. After 14 days, 21 subjects (95%) reported being very satisfied or satisfied with burst. Burst was preferred by 20 subjects (91%), tonic by 1 (5%), and 1 (5%) reported no preference. Better pain relief was the most common reason cited for preference.ConclusionsA majority of subjects reported improved pain relief using burst compared with tonic stimulation. Most subjects experienced less paresthesia during burst and preferred burst citing better pain relief.
Spontaneous rupture of the esophagus (Boerhaave syndrome) is an extremely rare, life-threatening condition. Traditionally surgery was the treatment of choice. Endoscopic stent insertion offers a promising alternative. The aim of this study was to compare the results of primary surgical therapy with endoscopic stenting. A British and a German high-volume center for esophageal surgery participated in this retrospective study. At the British center, operative therapy (primary repair or surgical drainage) was routinely carried out. Endoscopic stent insertion was the primary treatment option at the German center. Only patients with nonmalignant, spontaneous rupture of the esophagus (Boerhaave syndrome) were included. Demographic characteristics, comorbidity, clinical course, and outcome were analyzed. The study comprises 38 patients with a median age of 60 years. Time between rupture and treatment was less than 24 hours in 22 patients. Overall mortality was four of 38. Diagnosis greater than 24 hours was associated with higher risk for fatal outcome (odds ratio [OR], 4.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33 to 265.79). The surgery (S) and the endoscopic stent group (E) included 20 and 13 cases, respectively. Esophagectomy was unavoidable in three cases and two were managed conservatively. There were no significant differences in age, time to diagnosis less than 24 hours, intensive care unit days, hospital stay, sepsis, renal failure, slow respiratory weaning, or presence of comorbidity between the two groups. In 11 of 13 in the stent group, operative intervention (video-assisted thoracic surgery, thoracotomy, mediastinotomy) was eventually mandatory and three of 13 even required repeated surgery. The rate of reoperation in the surgery group was six of 20. Mortality was two of 13 (E) versus one of 20 (S). The odds for fatal outcome were 3.3 times higher in the stent group than in the surgery group (OR, 3.32; 95% CI, 0.15 to 213.98). Management of Boerhaave syndrome by means of endoscopic stent insertion offers no advantage regarding morbidity, intensive care unit or hospital stay, and is associated with frequent treatment failure eventually requiring surgical intervention. Furthermore, endoscopic stenting shows a higher risk for fatal outcome than primary surgical therapy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.