0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Special Feature |

Image of the Month—Diagnosis FREE

[+] Author Affiliations

SECTION EDITOR: CARL E. BREDENBERG, MD

More Author Information
JAMA Surg. 2013;148(3):296. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.318b.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

The CT scan was very concerning for esophageal injury. To further delineate the operative approach of right thoracotomy vs left neck exploration to examine the esophagus, a meglumine diatrizote (Gastrografin) swallow study was performed. The swallow study showed a bullet in the superior mediastinum in the cervicothoracic esophagus. This was best approached through the left neck (Figure 2). At exploration, a 4-cm tear in the cervical esophagus was noted. The cervical esophagus injury was closed in 2 layers, with closure of the mucosa with an interrupted inner layer of 4-0 nonabsorbable suture. The muscular layer of the esophagus was closed with interrupted Lembert sutures of 4-0 silk. A Jackson-Pratt drain was placed. Postoperatively, the patient did well; he did develop a thoracic duct leak that was conservatively managed. He had negative Gastrografin swallow study results on postoperative day 6, tolerated a general diet, and was subsequently discharged home on postoperative day 13.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 2. Initial meglumine diatrizote (Gastrografin) swallow study results.

Transmediastinal gunshot wounds can be devastating injuries. In hemodynamically unstable patients, immediate operation is indicated as these patients may have major cardiac or vascular injury. In hemodynamically stable patients, however, the patient can be uninjured or have occult vascular, esophageal, or tracheobronchial injury. Evaluation of these patients traditionally includes angiography, bronchoscopy, esophagoscopy, and pericardial window. With the advent of contrast-enhanced CT scan, however, evaluation of injury can often be accomplished with only a CT scan showing the missile tract through the mediastinum. Certainly further investigational studies can be used to better delineate injuries that may require further intervention.1

Penetrating esophageal injuries are an uncommon injury because of the esophagus's central and protected location.2 Esophageal injuries occur in approximately 3% to 6% of neck injuries.3 These injuries carry a high morbidity and a mortality of 20%.4 Factors that lead to the increase in morbidity include difficulty of accessing the esophagus, propensity of esophageal repair breakdown due to its lack of a strong serosal layer, and proximity of vital structures.5 Delay in operative repair is one of the key factors that has been shown to increase esophageal morbidity.6

The mainstay of diagnostic workup of esophageal injury is CT scan, which can show extraluminal air, fluid, or abscess. Water-soluble contrast study is the gold standard for further delineating esophageal perforation.7 If patients cannot undergo such evaluation then videoendoscopy may be an alternative method of diagnosis in high-risk trauma patients.8 Nonoperative treatment is often appropriate for patients with iatrogenic perforation; however, standard treatment for penetrating esophageal injury includes immediate operative repair without delay. Primary repair, if possible, should be attempted, while exclusion and diversion should be considered if damage is too extensive.5

Return to Quiz Case.

Correspondence: Anna M. Leung, MD, Department of Surgical Oncology, John Wayne Cancer Institute at St John's Health Center, 2200 Santa Monica Blvd, Santa Monica, CA 90404 (anleung100@hotmail.com).

Accepted for Publication: January 13, 2013.

Author Contributions:Study concept and design: Leung and Ivatury. Acquisition of data: Leung, Goldberg, and Ivatury. Analysis and interpretation of data: Leung, Goldberg, and Ivatury. Drafting of the manuscript: Leung, Goldberg, and Ivatury. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Leung, Goldberg, and Ivatury. Administrative, technical, and material support: Goldberg. Study supervision: Goldberg.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Stassen NA, Lukan JK, Spain DA,  et al.  Reevaluation of diagnostic procedures for transmediastinal gunshot wounds.  J Trauma. 2002;53(4):635-638, discussion 638
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hatzitheofilou C, Strahlendorf C, Kakoyiannis S, Charalambides D, Demetriades D. Penetrating external injuries of the oesophagus and pharynx.  Br J Surg. 1993;80(9):1147-1149
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Back MR, Baumgartner FJ, Klein SR. Detection and evaluation of aerodigestive tract injuries caused by cervical and transmediastinal gunshot wounds.  J Trauma. 1997;42(4):680-686
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bhatia P, Fortin D, Inculet RI, Malthaner RA. Current concepts in the management of esophageal perforations: a twenty-seven year Canadian experience.  Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;92(1):209-215
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Søreide JA, Viste A. Esophageal perforation: diagnostic work-up and clinical decision-making in the first 24 hours.  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2011;19:66
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Asensio JA, Chahwan S, Forno W,  et al; American Association for the Surgery of Trauma.  Penetrating esophageal injuries: multicenter study of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma.  J Trauma. 2001;50(2):289-296
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Rubesin SE, Levine MS. Radiologic diagnosis of gastrointestinal perforation.  Radiol Clin North Am. 2003;41(6):1095-1115, v
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ahmed N, Massier C, Tassie J, Whalen J, Chung R. Diagnosis of penetrating injuries of the pharynx and esophagus in the severely injured patient.  J Trauma. 2009;67(1):152-154
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 2. Initial meglumine diatrizote (Gastrografin) swallow study results.

Tables

References

Stassen NA, Lukan JK, Spain DA,  et al.  Reevaluation of diagnostic procedures for transmediastinal gunshot wounds.  J Trauma. 2002;53(4):635-638, discussion 638
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hatzitheofilou C, Strahlendorf C, Kakoyiannis S, Charalambides D, Demetriades D. Penetrating external injuries of the oesophagus and pharynx.  Br J Surg. 1993;80(9):1147-1149
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Back MR, Baumgartner FJ, Klein SR. Detection and evaluation of aerodigestive tract injuries caused by cervical and transmediastinal gunshot wounds.  J Trauma. 1997;42(4):680-686
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bhatia P, Fortin D, Inculet RI, Malthaner RA. Current concepts in the management of esophageal perforations: a twenty-seven year Canadian experience.  Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;92(1):209-215
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Søreide JA, Viste A. Esophageal perforation: diagnostic work-up and clinical decision-making in the first 24 hours.  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2011;19:66
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Asensio JA, Chahwan S, Forno W,  et al; American Association for the Surgery of Trauma.  Penetrating esophageal injuries: multicenter study of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma.  J Trauma. 2001;50(2):289-296
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Rubesin SE, Levine MS. Radiologic diagnosis of gastrointestinal perforation.  Radiol Clin North Am. 2003;41(6):1095-1115, v
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Ahmed N, Massier C, Tassie J, Whalen J, Chung R. Diagnosis of penetrating injuries of the pharynx and esophagus in the severely injured patient.  J Trauma. 2009;67(1):152-154
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles