This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Arthur E. Flynn, MD; Edward D. Verrier, MD; Lawrence W. Way, MD; Arthur N. Thomas, MD; Carlos A. Pellegrini, MD

Arch Surg. 1989;124(10):1211-1215.

Abstract
• Sixty-nine patients with perforation of the esophagus were treated at the University of California, San Francisco, from 1977 to 1988. The perforation was iatrogenic in 33 (48%) of the patients, spontaneous in 8 (12%), and a result of external trauma in 23 (33%). Clinical findings included chest pain in 36 (52%) of 69 patients, subcutaneous emphysema in 22 (32%) of 59 patients, and pneumomediastinum in 21 (36%) of 59 patients. Esophagograms demonstrated the perforation in 40 (93%) of 43 patients. Treatment delays of more than 24 hours occurred in about half of spontaneous and iatrogenic perforations, but when the perforation was due to external trauma, treatment was delayed infrequently. Operative therapy in 59 (86%) of the patients included primary closure in 44 patients, drainage alone in 9 patients, and Celestin tube placement in 1 patient. Four patients with benign strictures had esophagectomy, and 4 patients with achalasia had Heller myotomy in addition to closure of the perforation. Eight (12%) of the patients were treated nonoperatively. For thoracic perforations, nonoperative treatment was reserved for patients who were diagnosed late but who had minimal evidence of sepsis. Seven (10%) of the patients died. Factors that influenced outcome included cause of perforation, anatomic location, and patient age. Our study shows that a high index of suspicion, aggressive use of esophagography, and individualized treatment are necessary for the best results when treating esophageal perforation.

(Arch Surg. 1989;124:1211-1215)

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Surgery, University of California Medical Center, San Francisco.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication June 12, 1989.

Read before the 60th Annual Meeting of the Pacific Coast Surgical Association, Vancouver, Canada, February 22, 1989.

Reprint requests to Department of Surgery, U122, University of California Medical Center, San Francisco, CA 94143 (Dr Pellegrini).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Unusual case of Boerhaave syndrome, diagnosed late and successfully treated by Abbott's T-tube
Santini et al.
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2007;134:539-540.
FULL TEXT  

Conservative management of iatrogenic oesophageal perforations -- a viable option
Hasan et al.
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2005;28:7-10.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Conservative Approach to the Mediastinitis in Childhood Secondary to Esophageal Perforation
Demirbag et al.
CLIN PEDIATR 2005;44:131-134.
ABSTRACT  

Evolving options in the management of esophageal perforation
Brinster et al.
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2004;77:1475-1483.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Thoracic esophageal perforations: a decade of experience
Port et al.
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2003;75:1071-1074.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Primary esophageal repair for Boerhaave's syndrome
Lawrence et al.
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 1999;67:818-820.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Reinforced Primary Repair of Thoracic Esophageal Perforation
Wright et al.
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 1995;60:245-248.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Intrathoracic esophageal perforation: The merit of primary repair
Whyte et al.
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 1995;109:140-146.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Surgical Repair of Esophageal Perforation due to Pneumatic Dilatation for Achalasia: Is Myotomy Really Necessary?
Pricolo et al.
Arch Surg 1993;128:540-544.
ABSTRACT