Introduction
How we do it
Results
Pat. No | Sex | Age | Diagnosis, OP | Days between OP and first sponge insertion | Initial placement | Number of Sponge changes | Intraprocedural complications | Primary outcome |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | W | 81 | Adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction | 2 | Cavity | 8 | None | Died, unrelated |
2 | M | 65 | Adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction | 8 | Lumen | 4 | None | Remission |
3 | W | 58 | Proximal gastric carcinoma | 6 | Cavity | 4 | None | Remission, stricture |
4 | M | 61 | Barrett’s carcinoma | 6 | Cavity | 15 | None | Remission, stricture |
5 | W | 74 | Paraesopahgeal hernia; perforation of esophagus during hiatoplasty | 1 | Cavity | 5 | None | Remission |
6 | M | 54 | Adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction | 14 | Cavity | 11 | 1st: Bleeding; 6th dislocation (stomach) | Remission |
7 | M | 61 | Adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction | 15 | Cavity | 2 | None | Remission, stricture |
Discussion
Declarations
Ethics approval
All procedures were in accordance with the standards of the Ethics Committee of Brandenburg Medical School and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Due to the safe anonymity of the retrospective study, no informed consent was needed from subjects for the purpose of publication.