Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Oct 9;16(1):291.
doi: 10.1186/s13019-021-01680-y.

Prognostic factors of esophageal perforation and rupture leading to mortality: a retrospective study

Jong Duk Kim  1
Affiliations

Prognostic factors of esophageal perforation and rupture leading to mortality: a retrospective study

Jong Duk Kim. J Cardiothorac Surg. .

Abstract

Background: Esophageal perforation and rupture (EPR) is a serious, potentially life-threatening condition. However, no treatment methods have been established, and data concerning factors affecting mortality are limited. This report presents the prognostic factors of mortality in EPR based on experience in the management of such patients.

Methods: For this retrospective analysis, 79 patients diagnosed as having EPR between 2006 and 2016 and managed at Gyeongsang National University Hospital were examined. The management method was determined in accordance with the location and size of the EPR, laboratory findings, and radiological findings. Thirty-nine patients were treated with surgery; and 40, with nonsurgical management.

Results: The most common cause of EPR was foreign body (fish bone or meat bone), followed by vomiting, iatrogenic causes, and trauma. Thirty-nine patients underwent primary repair of EPR, of whom 4 patients died. Forty patients underwent nonsurgical management, of whom 3 patients died. The remaining patients were discharged. Mortality correlated with the size of the EPR (> 25 mm) and the segmented neutrophil count percentage (> 86.5%) in the white blood cell test and differential.

Conclusions: The mortality risk was increased when the EPR size and the segmented neutrophil count percentage in the white blood cell test and differential was high. Delayed diagnosis, which was considered an important predictive factor in previous investigations, was not statistically significant in this study.

Trial registration: Not applicable.

Keywords: Esophageal perforation; Esophageal rupture; Fish bone; Retrospective.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Management of esophageal perforation and rupture (EPR)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Receiver-operating curve analysis of mortality
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Shanda HB, Rachel S, Peter S, Alberto B, Brian JD. Utility of removable esophageal covered self-expanding metal stents for leak and fistula management. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010;89:931–936. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.10.061. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tullavardhana T. Iatrogenic esophageal perforation. J Med Assoc Thai. 2015;98:s177–s183. - PubMed
    1. Jones WG, 2nd, Ginsberg RJ. Esophageal perforation: a continuing challenge. Ann Thorac Surg. 1992;53:534–543. doi: 10.1016/0003-4975(92)90294-E. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brinster CJ, Singhal S, Lee L, Marshall MB, Kaiser LR, Kucharczuk JC. Evolving options in the management of esophageal perforation. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77:1475. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2003.08.037. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kaman L, Iqbal J, Kundil B, Kochhar R. Management of esophageal perforation in adults. Gastroenterol Res. 2010;3:235–244. - PMC - PubMed