PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of surgical treatment for esophageal perforation. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed. We conducted a search strategy in the main electronic databases such as PubMed, Embase and Lilacs to identify all case series. RESULTS: Thirty three case series met the inclusion criteria with a total of 1417 participants. The predominant etiology was iatrogenic (54.2%) followed by spontaneous cause (20.4%) and in 66.1% the localization was thoracic. In 65.4% and 33.4% surgical and conservative therapy, respectively, was considered the first choice. There was a statistically significance different with regards mortality rate favoring the surgical group (16.3%) versus conservative treatment (21.2%) (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Surgical treatment was more effective and safe than conservative treatment concerning mortality rates, although the possibility of bias due to clinical and methodological heterogeneity among the included studies and the level of evidence that cannot be ruled out.
Esophageal Perforation; Therapeutics; Treatment Outcome; Mortality; Surgery; Drainage
