# Multimodal therapeutic options for esophageal perforations—a single-center experience

**Authors:** Maximilian Gruber, Lars Kollmann, Johan Friso Lock, Sven Flemming, Stanislaus Reimer, Markus Brand, Armin Wiegering, Alexander Meining, Ivan Aleksic, Christoph-Thomas Germer, Florian Seyfried

PMC · DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2025.1662261 · Frontiers in Surgery · 2025-10-01

## TL;DR

This study compares treatment approaches for esophageal perforations, finding that endoscopy is often used first but surgery may be needed for severe cases.

## Contribution

The study provides insights into multimodal treatment strategies for spontaneous versus other esophageal perforations based on a single-center experience.

## Key findings

- Endoscopic treatment was used in 34.4% of cases, while surgery was used in 37.8%.
- Spontaneous esophageal perforations were associated with larger defects and higher complication scores.
- Sepsis at admission and spontaneous perforation were independent risk factors for worse outcomes.

## Abstract

Esophageal perforation is a life-threatening condition with a high mortality rate. The current therapeutic options range from conservative to endoscopic to surgical treatment. We aimed to compare specific patterns of multimodal management of spontaneous vs. other esophageal perforations.

The data from all consecutive patients diagnosed with either spontaneous (Boerhaave syndrome, BS) vs. other esophageal perforation (OEP) between 2010 and 2023 were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. The secondary endpoints were overall complications (Comprehensive Complication Index, CCI), therapy-associated complications, oral nutrition at discharge, and length-of-stay.

In total, 32 patients were identified, of whom 15 were diagnosed with BS and 17 with OEP. Initially, 11/32 (34.4%) were primarily treated endoscopically, 12/32 (37.8%) with surgery, and 8/32 (25.0%) with a combined treatment. Patients with BS had larger perforations (22.50 vs. 15.00 mm, p = .05) and higher complication scores (CCI: 61.80 vs. 45.60, p = .076). Over the course, the primary therapeutic regimen (endoscopic or local surgical treatment) had to be escalated in 36.4% of the patients. Overall, the in-hospital mortality rate was 9.4% (3/32 patients), with a strong trend toward a higher mortality rate in patients with BS (20.0 vs. 0.0%, p = .053). Diagnoses of BS and sepsis at admission (β = 28.387, p = .012) were independent risk factors for a higher CCI score.

BS and sepsis at admission are risk factors for a complicated course. Endoscopy is the first choice for diagnosis and initial treatment. Patients with mediastinal gross contamination or large defects usually need surgical intervention, which should not be delayed.

## Linked entities

- **Diseases:** Boerhaave syndrome (MONDO:0022013)

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** Boerhaave syndrome (MESH:C536571), BS (MESH:D001816), sepsis (MESH:D018805), Esophageal perforation (MESH:D004939), perforations (MESH:D057112)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12521197/full.md

## References

30 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12521197/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12521197