Esophageal Surgery Flashcards
Pollard, VRU, 2017:
Contrast videofluoroscopic swallowing studies in dysphagic dogs
What % of dysphagic dogs had multiple abnormalities?
Pollard, VRU, 2017:
38% had multiple abnormalities
Elvers, JVIM, 2019:
Videofluoroscopic swallowing studies in brachycephalic vs non-brachycephalic dogs
- What % of dogs had hiatal hernias?
- What % of dogs that had hiatal hernias were brachycephalic?
- What was brachycephaly associated with?
Elvers, JVIM, 2019:
- 22% had hiatal hernias
- 100% of the dogs that had hiatal hernias were brachycephalic
- Brachycephaly was associated with idiopathic esophageal dysmotility, prolonged esophageal transit time, gastroesophageal reflux and hiatal hernia
Burton, JVIM, 2017:
Esophageal foreign bodies
- Most common location for esophageal FB?
- Overall mortality rate?
- Mortality rates for surgical cases vs endoscopic cases?
- What % developed esophageal strictures?
- Risk factors for death?
Burton, JVIM, 2017:
- Most common location for esophageal FB was distal esophagus
- Overall mortality rate: 5%
- Mortality rates: 23% for surgical cases vs 2% for endoscopic cases
- 2% developed esophageal strictures
- Risk factors for death: esophageal perforation, hemorrhage within the esophagus
Sterman, JAVMA, 2018:
Esophageal perforation secondary to esophageal foreign body
- What % of dogs had esophageal perforation?
- What was associated with increased likelihood of esophageal perforation?
- What % of esophageal perforations were diagnosed on routine thoracic radiographs?
- What % of esophageal perforations did not require surgical intervention?
Sterman, JAVMA, 2018:
- 12% had esophageal perforations
- Delay in seeking veterinary attention increased the likelihood of esophageal perforation
- 27% of esophageal perforations were diagnosed on routine thoracic radiographs
- 60% of esophageal perforations did not require surgical intervention, suggesting rapid sealing of esophageal defects
Teh, JVECC, 2018:
Medical management of esophageal perforations secondary to esophageal foreign body
What % survived to discharge?
Teh, JVECC, 2018:
80% survived to discharge
Brisson, JAVMA, 2018:
Esophageal foreign bodies
- Most common esophageal foreign body?
- Most common location of esophageal foreign bodies?
- Most common location of fish hook foreign bodies vs bone foreign bodies?
- Factors associated with a poor outcome?
- What % developed esophageal strictures?
Brisson, JAVMA, 2018:
- Most common esophageal FB was bone (60% of cases)
- Most common location of esophageal FBs was caudal esophagus (58% of cases), followed by the heart base (23% of cases)
- Most common location for fish hook FBs was cervical esophagus, most common location for bone FBs was caudal esophagus
- Factors associated with a poor outcome: longer duration of FB entrapment, esophageal perforation, older age
- 11% developed esophageal strictures
Bongard, JVECC, 2019:
Esophageal foreign bodies
- Overall success rate for foreign body removal via esophagoscopy?
- Complication rate?
- Dogs with foreign bodies present for >24 hours were more likely to have what?
- What type of foreign body was more likely to require surgical removal?
Bongard, JVECC, 2019:
- Overall success rate for FB removal via esophagoscopy: 95%
- Complication rate: 22%
- Dogs with foreign bodies present for >24 hours were more likely to have severe esophagitis and major complications
- Fish hooks were more likely to require surgical removal
Lam, JVIM, 2013:
Esophageal stenting for refractory benign esophageal strictures
What % of dogs required intervention due to complications?
Lam, JVIM, 2013:
80% of dogs required intervention due to complications
Grobman, JVIM, 2019:
Mechanical dilation, botulinum toxin A injection and surgical myotomy with fundoplication for lower esophageal sphincter achalasia-like syndrome
- Duration of effect?
- What persisted despite clinical improvement?
Grobman, JVIM, 2019:
- Duration of effect: 40 days
- Megaesophagus and abnormal esophageal motility persisted despite clinical improvement
Breheny, JVIM, 2019:
Complications associated with esophageal feeding tubes
- Complication rate?
- What factors were associated with increased odds of developing a stoma site infection?
Breheny, JVIM, 2019:
- Complication rate: 36%
- Administration of glucocorticoids or oncolytic agents and discharge at the stoma site were associated with increased odds of developing a stoma site infection
Nathanson, JVIM, 2019:
Complications associated with esophageal feeding tubes
- Overall complication rate?
- What % of cats vs dogs developed signs of infection at the tube site?
- What % of cats vs dogs developed regurgitation of food through the tube stoma?
Nathanson, JVIM, 2019:
- 44% complication rate
- 18% of cats vs 14% of dogs developed signs of infection at the tube site
- 1% of cats vs 7% of dogs developed regurgitation of food through the tube stoma
Sutton, JAVMA, 2016:
Peri-op morbidity and outcome of esophageal surgery
- Overall complication rate in dogs vs cats?
- Intra-op complication rate in dogs vs cats?
- Immediate post-op complication rate in dogs vs cats?
- Delayed post-op complication rate in dogs vs cats?
- In dogs, what factors were associated with immediate post-op complications?
- In dogs, what factors were associated with delayed post-op complications?
- Mortality rate in dogs vs cats?
- Risk factors for death in dogs?
Sutton, JAVMA, 2016:
- Overall complication rate: 54% in dogs vs 33% in cats
- Intra-op complication rate: 13% in dogs vs 0% in cats
- Immediate post-op complication rate: 37% in dogs vs 33% in cats
- Delayed post-op complication rate: 21% in dogs vs 11% in cats
- In dogs, partial esophagectomy and esophageal resection and anastomosis were associated with development of immediate post-op complications
- In dogs, increasing lesion size and presence of a mass lesion were prognostic factors for the development of delayed post-op complications
- Mortality rate: 10% in dogs vs 11% in cats
- Risk factors for death in dogs were presence of pre-op pneumomediastinum and leukopenia