Dataset Information

Diagnostic and management strategies for congenital H-type tracheoesophageal fistula: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

H type tracheoesophageal fistula (H-TEF) is a rare congenital anomaly. Management may be complicated by late diagnosis and variation(s) in the therapeutic strategy. A systematic review of published studies explores the utility of diagnostic studies, operations and postoperative complications.

Methods

Medline and PubMed database(s) were searched for ALL studies reporting H-TEF during 1997-2020. Using PRISMA methodology, manuscripts were screened for eligibility and reporting.

Results

Forty-seven eligible studies were analysed. Primary diagnosis varied widely with surgeons performing oesophagography and trachea-bronchoscopy. Preoperative localisation techniques included fluoroscopy, guidewire placement and catheterisation. A cervical approach (209 of 272 cases), as well as thoracotomy, thoracoscopy and endoscopic fistula ligation, were all described. Morbidity included fistula recurrence (1.7%), leak (2%), tracheomalacia (3.4%) and respiratory sequelae (1%). The major adverse complication in all studies was vocal cord palsy secondary to laryngeal nerve injury (18.5%) yet strikingly few centres routinely reported undertaking vocal cord screening pre or postoperatively.

Conclusion

This study shows that paediatric surgeons record low volume activity with H type tracheoesophageal fistula. Variation(s) in clinical practice are widely evident. Laryngeal nerve injury and its subsequent management warrant special consideration. Care pathways may offset attendant morbidity and define 'best practice.'

SUBMITTER: Sampat K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8026411 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCurrently, the optimal management strategy for chronic type B aortic dissections (CBAD) is unknown. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the literature to compare results of open surgical repair (OSR), standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) or branched and fenestrated TEVAR (BEVAR/FEVAR) for CBAD.MethodsEMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched for eligible studies between January 2000 and October 2015. Studies describing outcomes of OSR, TEVAR, B/FEVAR, or all, for CBAD patients initially treated with medical therapy, were included. Primary endpoints were early mortality, and one-year and five-year survival. Secondary endpoints included occurrence of complications. Furthermore, a Time until Treatment Equipoise (TUTE) graph was constructed.ResultsThirty-five articles were selected for systematic review. A total of 1081 OSR patients, 1397 TEVAR patients and 61 B/FEVAR patients were identified. Early mortality ranged from 5.6% to 21.0% for OSR, 0.0% to 13.7% for TEVAR, and 0.0% to 9.7% for B/FEVAR. For OSR, one-year and five-year survival ranged 72.0%-92.0% and 53.0%-86.7%, respectively. For TEVAR, one-year survival was 82.9%-100.0% and five-year survival 70.0%-88.9%. For B/FEVAR only one-year survival was available, ranging between 76.4% and 100.0%. Most common postoperative complications included stroke (OSR 0.0%-13.3%, TEVAR 0.0%-11.8%), spinal cord ischemia (OSR 0.0%-16.4%, TEVAR 0.0%-12.5%, B/FEVAR 0.0%-12.9%) and acute renal failure (OSR 0.0%-33.3%, TEVAR 0.0%-34.4%, B/FEVAR 0.0%-3.2%). Most common long-term complications after OSR included aneurysm formation (5.8%-20.0%) and new type A dissection (1.7-2.2%). Early complications after TEVAR included retrograde dissection (0.0%-7.1%), malperfusion (1.3%-9.4%), cardiac complications (0.0%-5.9%) and rupture (0.5%-5.0%). Most common long-term complications after TEVAR were rupture (0.5%-7.1%), endoleaks (0.0%-15.8%) and cardiac complications (5.9%-7.1%). No short-term aortic rupture or malperfusion was observed after B/FEVAR. Long-term complications included malperfusion (6.5%) and endoleaks (0.0%-66.7%). Reintervention rates after OSR, TEVAR and B/FEVAR were 5.8%-29.0%, 4.3%-47.4% and 0.0%-53.3%, respectively. TUTE for OSR was 2.7 years, for TEVAR 9.9 months and for B/FEVAR 10.3 months.ConclusionWe found a limited early survival benefit of standard TEVAR over OSR for CBAD. Complication rates after TEVAR are higher, but complications after OSR are usually more serious. Initial experiences with B/FEVAR show its feasibility, but long-term results are needed to compare it to OSR and standard TEVAR. We conclude that optimal treatment of CBAD remains debatable and merits a patient specific decision. TUTE seems a feasible and useful tool to better understand management outcomes of CBAD.