PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
October 2, 2025Frontiers in Surgery2 citationsOpen Access

Multimodal therapeutic options for esophageal perforations—a single-center experience

View Full Paper
MGMaximilian GruberLKLars KollmannJLJohan Friso Lock

Key Points

  • In-hospital mortality rate from esophageal perforations was 9.4%, with Boerhaave syndrome linked to higher mortality.
  • Patients with Boerhaave syndrome had larger perforations (22.50 mm) and higher complication scores than those with other types.
  • Endoscopic treatment was the first approach for 34.4% of patients, while 37.8% required surgical interventions.
  • Boerhaave syndrome and sepsis at admission are independent risk factors for complications during management.

Abstract

Background Esophageal perforation is a life-threatening condition with a high mortality rate. The current therapeutic options range from conservative to endoscopic to surgical treatment. We aimed to compare specific patterns of multimodal management of spontaneous vs. other esophageal perforations. Methods The data from all consecutive patients diagnosed with either spontaneous (Boerhaave syndrome, BS) vs. other esophageal perforation (OEP) between 2010 and 2023 were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. The secondary endpoints were overall complications (Comprehensive Complication Index, CCI), therapy-associated complications, oral nutrition at discharge, and length-of-stay. Results In total, 32 patients were identified, of whom 15 were diagnosed with BS and 17 with OEP. Initially, 11/32 (34.4%) were primarily treated endoscopically, 12/32 (37.8%) with surgery, and 8/32 (25.0%) with a combined treatment. Patients with BS had larger perforations (22.50 vs. 15.00 mm, p = .05) and higher complication scores (CCI: 61.80 vs. 45.60, p = .076). Over the course, the primary therapeutic regimen (endoscopic or local surgical treatment) had to be escalated in 36.4% of the patients. Overall, the in-hospital mortality rate was 9.4% (3/32 patients), with a strong trend toward a higher mortality rate in patients with BS (20.0 vs. 0.0%, p = .053). Diagnoses of BS and sepsis at admission ( β = 28.387, p = .012) were independent risk factors for a higher CCI score. Conclusions BS and sepsis at admission are risk factors for a complicated course. Endoscopy is the first choice for diagnosis and initial treatment. Patients with mediastinal gross contamination or large defects usually need surgical intervention, which should not be delayed.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Gruber et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68de6f3183cbc991d0a21f34https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2025.1662261
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper