Alexandra Menni, George Stavrou, Georgios Tzikos, Anne D. Shrewsbury, Katerina Kotzampassi
{"title":"Endoscopic Salvage of Gastrointestinal Anastomosis Leaks—Past, Present, and Future—A Narrated Review","authors":"Alexandra Menni, George Stavrou, Georgios Tzikos, Anne D. Shrewsbury, Katerina Kotzampassi","doi":"10.3390/gidisord5030032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Anastomotic leakage, which is defined as a defect in the integrity of a surgical join between two hollow viscera leading to communication between the intraluminal and extraluminal compartments, continues to be of high incidence and one of the most feared complications following gastrointestinal surgery, with a significant potential for a fatal outcome. Surgical options for management are limited and carry a high risk of morbidity and mortality; thus, surgeons are urged to look for alternative options which are minimally invasive, repeatable, non-operative, and do not require general anesthesia. Methods: A narrative review of the international literature took place, including PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar, utilizing specific search terms such as “Digestive Surgery AND Anastomotic Leakage OR leak OR dehiscence”. Results: In the present review, we try to describe and analyze the pros and cons of the various endoscopic techniques: from the very first (and still available), fibrin gluing, to endoclip and over-the-scope clip positioning, stent insertion, and the latest suturing and endoluminal vacuum devices. Finally, alongside efforts to improve the existing techniques, we consider stem cell application as well as non-endoscopic, and even endoscopic, attempts at intraluminal microbiome modification, which should ultimately intervene pre-emptively, rather than therapeutically, to prevent leaks. Conclusions: In the last three decades, this search for an ideal device for closure, which must be safe, easy to deploy, inexpensive, robust, effect rapid and stable closure of even large defects, and have a low complication rate, has led to the proposal and application of a number of different endoscopic devices and techniques. However, to date, there is no consensus as to the best. The literature contains reports of only small studies and no randomized trials, failing to take into account both the heterogeneity of leaks and their different anatomical sites.","PeriodicalId":73131,"journal":{"name":"Gastrointestinal disorders (Basel, Switzerland)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastrointestinal disorders (Basel, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/gidisord5030032","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Anastomotic leakage, which is defined as a defect in the integrity of a surgical join between two hollow viscera leading to communication between the intraluminal and extraluminal compartments, continues to be of high incidence and one of the most feared complications following gastrointestinal surgery, with a significant potential for a fatal outcome. Surgical options for management are limited and carry a high risk of morbidity and mortality; thus, surgeons are urged to look for alternative options which are minimally invasive, repeatable, non-operative, and do not require general anesthesia. Methods: A narrative review of the international literature took place, including PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar, utilizing specific search terms such as “Digestive Surgery AND Anastomotic Leakage OR leak OR dehiscence”. Results: In the present review, we try to describe and analyze the pros and cons of the various endoscopic techniques: from the very first (and still available), fibrin gluing, to endoclip and over-the-scope clip positioning, stent insertion, and the latest suturing and endoluminal vacuum devices. Finally, alongside efforts to improve the existing techniques, we consider stem cell application as well as non-endoscopic, and even endoscopic, attempts at intraluminal microbiome modification, which should ultimately intervene pre-emptively, rather than therapeutically, to prevent leaks. Conclusions: In the last three decades, this search for an ideal device for closure, which must be safe, easy to deploy, inexpensive, robust, effect rapid and stable closure of even large defects, and have a low complication rate, has led to the proposal and application of a number of different endoscopic devices and techniques. However, to date, there is no consensus as to the best. The literature contains reports of only small studies and no randomized trials, failing to take into account both the heterogeneity of leaks and their different anatomical sites.