Clinical Journal of Gastroenterology

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 118–122 | Cite as

Delayed perforation after endoscopic submucosal dissection treated successfully by temporary stent placement

  • Masami Omae
  • Magnus Konradsson
  • Francisco Baldaque-Silva
Case Report


A 71-year-old male patient with a long-segment (C10M12) Barrett’s esophagus harboring multifocal high-grade dysplasia was referred to our clinic. After a multidisciplinary team conference and the patient’s informed consent, an endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was performed with resection of 4/5 of the esophageal circumference along 12 cm, without any complications during or immediately after the procedure. In the day after the ESD, the patient presented suddenly with dyspnea and subcutaneous emphysema in the neck and chest. A computed tomography (CT) showed subcutaneous emphysema in the neck and pneumomediastinum, confirming the diagnosis of delayed perforation. There was gradual progression into respiratory failure with the need for ventilatory support. Endoscopic treatment was decided and 2 fully covered self-expandable metal stents were deployed in the esophagus. Patient’s clinical condition improved and oral diet was resumed at day 7. Stents were retrieved at day 12 and there were no strictures on the 2 and 6-month follow-ups. This is the first report of delayed perforation after endoscopic submucosal disection in the esophagus that was successfully managed with endoscopic therapy.


Barrett’s esophagus High-grade dysplasia Endoscopic submucosal dissection Delayed perforation Temporary stent placement 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human rights

All procedures followed have been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Ono S, Fujishiro M, Niimi K, et al. Long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal squamous cell neoplasms. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;70:860–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hirasawa K, Kokawa A, Oka H, et al. Superficial adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: long-term results of endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;72:960–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Repici A, Hassan C, Carlino A, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients with early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: results from a prospective Western series. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71:715–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Isomoto H, Yamaguchi N, Minami H, Nakao K. Management of complications associated with endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection for esophageal cancer. Dig Endosc. 2013;25(Suppl 1):29–38.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Noguchi M, Yano T, Kato T, et al. Risk factors for intraoperative perforation during endoscopic submucosal dissection of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 2017;23:478–85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Watari J, Tomita T, Toyoshima F, et al. Clinical outcomes and risk factors for perforation in gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection: a prospective pilot study. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;5:281–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mannen K, Tsunada S, Hara M, et al. Risk factors for complications of endoscopic submucosal dissection in gastric tumors: analysis of 478 lesions. J Gastroenterol. 2009;45:30–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim ES, Cho KB, Park KS, et al. Factors predictive of perforation during endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of colorectal tumors. Endoscopy. 2011;43:573–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mizushima T, Kato M, Iwanaga I, et al. Technical difficulty according to location, and risk factors for perforation, in endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal tumors. Surg Endosc. 2014;29:133–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hirasawa K, Sato C, Makazu M, et al. Coagulation syndrome: delayed perforation after colorectal endoscopic treatments. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;7:1055–61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hanaoka N, Uedo N, Ishihara R, et al. Clinical features and outcomes of delayed perforation after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer. Endoscopy. 2010;42:1112–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Suzuki H, Oda I, Sekiguchi M, et al. Management and associated factors of delayed perforation after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection. World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21:12635–43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yano T, Tanabe S, Ishido K, et al. Delayed perforation after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: clinical features and treatment. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;8:368–73.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Matsuda Y, Kataoka N, Yamaguchi T, et al. Delayed esophageal perforation occurring with endoscopic submucosal dissection: a report of two cases. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;7:123–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haito-Chavez Y, Law JK, Kratt T, et al. International multicenter experience with an over-the-scope clipping device for endoscopic management of GI defects (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80:610–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Takimoto K, Hagiwara A. Filling and shielding for postoperative gastric perforations of endoscopic submucosal dissection using polyglycolic acid sheets and fibrin glue. Endosc Int Open. 2016;4:E661–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Law R, Prabhu A, Fujii-Lau L, Shannon C, Singh S. Stent migration following endoscopic suture fixation of esophageal self-expandable metal stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2017. (epub ahead of print).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Persson S, Rouvelas I, Kumagai K, et al. Treatment of esophageal anastomotic leakage with self-expanding metal stents: analysis of risk factors for treatment failure. Endosc Int Open. 2016;4:E420–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Seven G, Irani S, Ross AS, et al. Partially versus fully covered self-expanding metal stents for benign and malignant esophageal conditions: a single center experience. Surg Endosc. 2016;27:2185–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Spaander MC, Baron TH, Siersema PD, et al. Esophageal stenting for benign and malignant disease: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy. 2016;48:939–48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japanese Society of Gastroenterology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masami Omae
    • 1
    • 2
  • Magnus Konradsson
    • 1
  • Francisco Baldaque-Silva
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Digestive DiseasesKarolinska University HospitalStockholmSweden
  2. 2.Department of Gastroenterology, Cancer Institute HospitalJapanese Foundation for Cancer ResearchTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations