Search

Primary achalasia is a progressive neurodegenerative disease. The goal of therapy is to disrupt the lower esophageal sphincter to improve emptying while avoiding reflux. Patient reported outcomes continue to be the primary measure of success of myotomy but objective measures of myotomy adequacy, GERD development, and reinterventions are also critical outcomes post treatment. A simple, tabular broad based scoring card that captures each of these testing measures can better display the changes that arise after intervention and allow for comparison.

Background Primary cardiac sarcomas are rare, aggressive types of malignancies with poor prognoses and can rarely present with thrombocytopenia. Sarcomas account for 65% of primary malignant cardiac tumours. Clinical symptoms often present with constitutional symptoms such as shortness of breath, weight loss, and fatigue. In addition, the tumour’s location determines treatment options and prognosis. Multimodal imaging facilitates the detection and assessment of cardiovascular tumours. This case study presents a rare primary right heart cardiac sarcoma presenting with thrombocytopenia. Case summary An 80-year-old male presented to the emergency department with complaints of worsening dyspnoea, ease of bruising, and chest pain. An extensive investigation into the cause of thrombocytopenia was performed. A transthoracic echocardiogram, computed tomography scan, and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) image revealed a large mass affecting the right atrium and right ventricle. Myocardial biopsy showed high-grade angiosarcoma. Due to his advanced age and intraventricular septal involvement of the mass, the multidisciplinary team decided to proceed with palliative chemotherapy. Discussion Many cardiac tumours remain asymptomatic, and the diagnosis is made at an advanced stage of the disease. Differential diagnoses of the intramural masses include haemangiomas, lipomas, rhabdomyomas, lymphomas, and sarcomas. Multiple treatment options should be considered to address thrombocytopenia. Tumour diagnosis and identification consist of laboratory tests and multimodal imaging. Complete surgical resection with neoadjuvant and adjuvant purposes is the mainstay of cardiac sarcoma therapy. A multidisciplinary, individualized care approach should be performed.

The magnetic sphincter augmentation device (MSA) provides effective relief of gastroesophageal reflux symptoms. Dysphagia after MSA implantation sometimes prompts endoscopic dilation. The manufacturer’s instructions are that it be performed 6 or more weeks after implantation under fluoroscopic guidance to not more than 15 mm keeping 3 or more beads closed. The purpose of this study was to assess adherence to these recommendations and explore the techniques used and outcomes after MSA dilation. We conducted a multicenter retrospective review of patients undergoing dilation for dysphagia after MSA placement from 2012 to 2018. A total of 144 patients underwent 245 dilations. The median size of MSA placed was 14 beads (range 12–17) and the median time to dilation was 175 days. A second dilation was performed in 67 patients, 22 patients had a third dilation and 7 patients underwent 4 or more dilations. In total, 17 devices (11.8%) were eventually explanted. The majority of dilations were performed with a balloon dilator (81%). The median dilator size was 18 mm and 73.4% were done with a dilator larger than 15 mm. There was no association between dilator size and need for subsequent dilation. Fluoroscopy was used in 28% of cases. There were no perforations or device erosions related to dilation. There is no clinical credence to the manufacturer’s recommendation for the use of fluoroscopy and limitation to 15 mm when dilating a patient for dysphagia after MSA implantation. Use of a larger size dilator was not associated with perforation or device erosion, but also did not reduce the need for repeat dilation. Given this, we would recommend that the initial dilation for any size MSA device be done using a 15 mm through-the-scope balloon dilator. Dysphagia prompting dilation after MSA implantation is associated with nearly a 12% risk of device explantation.

Achalasia outcome is primarily defined using the Eckardt score with failure recognized as > 3. However, patients experience many changes after myotomy including new onset GERD, swallowing difficulties, and potential need for additional treatment. We aim to devise a comprehensive assessment tool to demonstrate the extent of patient-reported outcomes, objective changes, and need for re-interventions following myotomy. We performed a retrospective chart review of surgically treated primary achalasia patients. We identified 185 patients without prior foregut surgery who underwent either per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) or Heller myotomy from 2005 to 2017. Eight outcome measures in subjective, objective, and interventional categories formulated a global postoperative assessment tool. These outcomes included Eckardt score, Dakkak Dysphagia score, GERD–HRQL score, normalization of pH scores and IRP, esophagitis, timed barium clearance at 5 min, and the most invasive re-intervention performed. Of 185 patients, achalasia subtypes included Type I = 42 (23%), II = 109 (59%), and III = 34 (18%). Patients underwent minimally invasive myotomy in 114 (62%), POEM in 71 (38%). Median proximal myotomy length was 4 cm (IQR 4–5) and distal 2 cm (IQR 2–2.5). Based on postoperative Eckardt score, 135/145 (93%) had successful treatment of achalasia. But, only 47/104 (45%) reported normal swallowing, and 78/108 (72%) had GERD–HRQL score ≤ 10. Objectively, IRP was normalized in 48/60 (80%), whereas timed barium clearance occurred in 51/84 (61%). No evidence of esophagitis was documented in 82/115 (71%). Postoperative normal DeMeester scores occurred in 38/76 (50%). No additional treatments were required in 110/139 (79%) of patients. Use of the Eckardt score alone to assess outcomes after achalasia surgery shows outstanding results. Using patient-reported outcomes, objective measurements, re-intervention rates, organized into a report card provides a more comprehensive and informative view.

Optimal treatment of esophageal cancer is a complex process dependent on many factors, including stage at diagnosis, medical fitness, physician judgment, and expertise. Despite significant advances in understanding of this cancer, survival remains low. Identifying patients with early-stage disease can enhance their outcomes dramatically. On a broader scale, staging is critical in advancing the quality of care delivered to these patients now and in the future. This article is designed to review clinicians' expertise with staging and to elaborate on the nuances frequently encountered when doing so.

The magnetic sphincter augmentation device (MSA) provides effective relief of gastroesophageal reflux symptoms. Dysphagia after MSA implantation sometimes prompts endoscopic dilation. The manufacturer's instructions are that it be performed 6 or more weeks after implantation under fluoroscopic guidance to not more than 15 mm keeping 3 or more beads closed. The purpose of this study was to assess adherence to these recommendations and explore the techniques used and outcomes after MSA dilation.We conducted a multicenter retrospective review of patients undergoing dilation for dysphagia after MSA placement from 2012 to 2018.A total of 144 patients underwent 245 dilations. The median size of MSA placed was 14 beads (range 12-17) and the median time to dilation was 175 days. A second dilation was performed in 67 patients, 22 patients had a third dilation and 7 patients underwent 4 or more dilations. In total, 17 devices (11.8%) were eventually explanted. The majority of dilations were performed with a balloon dilator (81%). The median dilator size was 18 mm and 73.4% were done with a dilator larger than 15 mm. There was no association between dilator size and need for subsequent dilation. Fluoroscopy was used in 28% of cases. There were no perforations or device erosions related to dilation.There is no clinical credence to the manufacturer's recommendation for the use of fluoroscopy and limitation to 15 mm when dilating a patient for dysphagia after MSA implantation. Use of a larger size dilator was not associated with perforation or device erosion, but also did not reduce the need for repeat dilation. Given this, we would recommend that the initial dilation for any size MSA device be done using a 15 mm through-the-scope balloon dilator. Dysphagia prompting dilation after MSA implantation is associated with nearly a 12% risk of device explantation.

This article provides an overview of current literature on blunt tracheobronchial injury, and discusses the presentation of tracheobronchial injuries in clinical and radiographic forms. A review of the current data on repair is provided with an outline of surgical management.

There are several elements that constitute the lower esophageal barrier against reflux. What characterizes the abnormality seen in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is the loss of an effective barrier combined with refluxed gastric contents. Several techniques including those described by Nissen, Toupet, and Hill have become options for reconstructing the physiologic barrier. In this paper, we describe our technique of performing laparoscopic Nissen, Hill, and a combined Nissen-Hill hybrid repair for the management of uncomplicated GERD. In a randomized study comparing 46 laparoscopic Nissen to 56 laparoscopic Hill repairs, subjective and objective short term and long term (13 months) outcomes including use of antisecretory agents were equivalent. The number of failures requiring reoperation were also the same but the difference in failure types prompted us to examine the two techniques and fuse them into one to maximize the integrity of the lower esophageal barrier. A comparative study of the Nissen, Hill, and hybrid repairs with 15-month follow-up showed similar subjective and objective outcomes and specifically no increase in dysphagia for the combined repair. There was also a trend towards less recurrence the hybrid group. More recently, we studied our Nissen repairs and compared them to hybrid repairs over a 22-month median follow-up period. Quality of life outcomes were superior for the hybrid group in all domains. For the subset of patients with a mean follow-up of 60 months the anatomic recurrence rate was 5% in the hybrid group compared to 45% in the Nissen group. These data strongly suggest that the anchoring of gastroesophageal junction with Hill sutures reduces the axial stresses on the Nissen wrap to maintain its integrity. The laparoscopic Nissen, and laparoscopic Hill procedures have been proven to have excellent results for the treatment of GERD. Larger studies are underway to demonstrate the long-term durability of the hybrid Nissen-Hill procedure in the management of GERD.

Achalasia outcome is primarily defined using the Eckardt score with failure recognized as 3. However, patients experience many changes after myotomy including new onset GERD, swallowing difficulties, and potential need for additional treatment. We aim to devise a comprehensive assessment tool to demonstrate the extent of patient-reported outcomes, objective changes, and need for re-interventions following myotomy.We performed a retrospective chart review of surgically treated primary achalasia patients. We identified 185 patients without prior foregut surgery who underwent either per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) or Heller myotomy from 2005 to 2017. Eight outcome measures in subjective, objective, and interventional categories formulated a global postoperative assessment tool. These outcomes included Eckardt score, Dakkak Dysphagia score, GERD-HRQL score, normalization of pH scores and IRP, esophagitis, timed barium clearance at 5 min, and the most invasive re-intervention performed.Of 185 patients, achalasia subtypes included Type I = 42 (23%), II = 109 (59%), and III = 34 (18%). Patients underwent minimally invasive myotomy in 114 (62%), POEM in 71 (38%). Median proximal myotomy length was 4 cm (IQR 4-5) and distal 2 cm (IQR 2-2.5). Based on postoperative Eckardt score, 135/145 (93%) had successful treatment of achalasia. But, only 47/104 (45%) reported normal swallowing, and 78/108 (72%) had GERD-HRQL score ≤ 10. Objectively, IRP was normalized in 48/60 (80%), whereas timed barium clearance occurred in 51/84 (61%). No evidence of esophagitis was documented in 82/115 (71%). Postoperative normal DeMeester scores occurred in 38/76 (50%). No additional treatments were required in 110/139 (79%) of patients.Use of the Eckardt score alone to assess outcomes after achalasia surgery shows outstanding results. Using patient-reported outcomes, objective measurements, re-intervention rates, organized into a report card provides a more comprehensive and informative view.

Background and Aims Therapeutic endoscopy plays a critical role in the management of upper GI (UGI) postsurgical leaks. Data are scarce regarding clinical success and safety. Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of endoscopic therapy for UGI postsurgical leaks and associated adverse events (AEs) and to identify factors associated with successful endoscopic therapy and AE occurrence. Methods This was a retrospective, multicenter, international study of all patients who underwent endoscopic therapy for UGI postsurgical leaks between 2014 and 2019. Results Two hundred six patients were included. Index surgery most often performed was sleeve gastrectomy (39.3%), followed by gastrectomy (23.8%) and esophagectomy (22.8%). The median time between index surgery and commencement of endoscopic therapy was 16 days. Endoscopic closure was achieved in 80.1% of patients after a median follow-up of 52 days (interquartile range, 33-81.3). Seven hundred seventy-five therapeutic endoscopies were performed. Multimodal therapy was needed in 40.8% of patients. The cumulative success of leak resolution reached a plateau between the third and fourth techniques (approximately 70%-80%); this was achieved after 125 days of endoscopic therapy. Smaller leak initial diameters, hospitalization in a general ward, hemodynamic stability, absence of respiratory failure, previous gastrectomy, fewer numbers of therapeutic endoscopies performed, shorter length of stay, and shorter times to leak closure were associated with better outcomes. Overall, 102 endoscopic therapy–related AEs occurred in 81 patients (39.3%), with most managed conservatively or endoscopically. Leak-related mortality rate was 12.4%. Conclusions Multimodal therapeutic endoscopy, despite being time-consuming and requiring multiple procedures, allows leak closure in a significant proportion of patients with a low rate of severe AEs.

The robotic platform has permeated esophageal surgery both in the abdominal and thoracic approaches. The most widely studied entities include achalasia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hiatal hernia and esophageal cancer. A literature review of robotic surgeries for the management of the above mentioned disorders is presented. Data is limited to meta-analyses, case series, or small prospective trials in the different indications. One exception is a randomized controlled trial looking at outcomes in esophageal cancer being managed with a hybrid robotic versus open approach. Overall differences when comparing laparoscopic or thoracoscopic surgery to robotic are few. These differences are best highlighted in the achalasia and esophageal cancer literature. There are less intraoperative mucosal injuries in robotic Heller myotomy. A large meta analysis found a rate of 1% versus 24.5% mucosal injury rate favoring the robotic versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy methods. With respect to esophagectomy data, there is slightly less vocal cord paralysis in the robotic versus MIE data, with a P value of 0.044. However, length of stay, intraoperative bleeding and major morbidity are similar across the various indications. Robotic esophageal surgery is a safe alternative to laparoscopic/thoracoscopic techniques. Further large-scale randomized trials are needed to fully ascertain if it yields superior outcomes.