A National Survey into referral and training in the management of oesophageal perforation in the United Kingdom

Background: Over the last 30 years, oesophageal surgery amongst thoracic surgeons has reduced by 80%, and forms less than 1% of current thoracic practice. Oesophageal perforation has a high morbidity, and mortality rates can be as high as 30% if not treated. There are currently no guidelines regarding referral for the management of oesophageal perforation in the UK. Methods: We designed an online survey to ascertain the current expert opinion on the management of oesophageal perforation, which was validated and approved by the society of cardiothoracic surgery of Great Britan and Ireland- SCTS. This was sent to all consultant thoracic (N=77) and cardiothoracic (N=85) surgeons identified in the SCTS registry. In total, 49 responses were received from a variety of UK regions. Results: Many responses indicated that emergency cover for oesophageal perforation came exclusively from the upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgeons (50%) compared to thoracic surgeons (18%). Only 37% agreed they would manage the patients themselves and a similar number were comfortable to operate alone. 46% of believed the service should be taken over exclusively by the UGI surgeons. With regards to surgical experience: 55% agreed they could comfortably deal with complex cases, which correlated with having >16 years experience. Only 25% of consultants with 1-5 years experience felt confident to manage the condition alone. With regards to previous training, 100% of consultants who trained >16 years ago believed they had sufficient exposure to oesophageal surgery as a trainee, compared to 50-70% for those trained <16 years ago. Only 2% believed current trainees receive sufficient exposure to oesophageal perforation nationwide, and 28% believed oesophageal surgery should be taken off the training curriculum. Conclusion: The present study finds much heterogeneity in the way oesophageal perforation is managed nationally. The willingness of thoracic surgeons to manage the oesophagus correlates with prior exposure. We believe this has important implications for current training and a national consensus for future direction is required.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal for Scientific Research
Published
2025-07-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.59992/ijsr.2025.v4n7p7
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Esophageal and GI Pathology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.01
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A National Survey into referral and training in the management of oesophageal perforation in the United Kingdom

Ali Abdelnour, M. Yousuf Salmasi, Bandar Nhar
1 citations
International Journal for Scientific Research
Esophageal and GI Pathology
2.01
article

A National Survey into referral and training in the management of oesophageal perforation in the United Kingdom

Ali Abdelnour, M. Yousuf Salmasi, Bandar Nhar
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Background: Over the last 30 years, oesophageal surgery amongst thoracic surgeons has reduced by 80%, and forms less than 1% of current thoracic practice. Oesophageal perforation has a high morbidity, and mortality rates can be as high as 30% if not treated. There are currently no guidelines regarding referral for the management of oesophageal perforation in the UK. Methods: We designed an online survey to ascertain the current expert opinion on the management of oesophageal perforation, which was validated and approved by the society of cardiothoracic surgery of Great Britan and Ireland- SCTS. This was sent to all consultant thoracic (N=77) and cardiothoracic (N=85) surgeons identified in the SCTS registry. In total, 49 responses were received from a variety of UK regions. Results: Many responses indicated that emergency cover for oesophageal perforation came exclusively from the upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgeons (50%) compared to thoracic surgeons (18%). Only 37% agreed they would manage the patients themselves and a similar number were comfortable to operate alone. 46% of believed the service should be taken over exclusively by the UGI surgeons. With regards to surgical experience: 55% agreed they could comfortably deal with complex cases, which correlated with having >16 years experience. Only 25% of consultants with 1-5 years experience felt confident to manage the condition alone. With regards to previous training, 100% of consultants who trained >16 years ago believed they had sufficient exposure to oesophageal surgery as a trainee, compared to 50-70% for those trained <16 years ago. Only 2% believed current trainees receive sufficient exposure to oesophageal perforation nationwide, and 28% believed oesophageal surgery should be taken off the training curriculum. Conclusion: The present study finds much heterogeneity in the way oesophageal perforation is managed nationally. The willingness of thoracic surgeons to manage the oesophagus correlates with prior exposure. We believe this has important implications for current training and a national consensus for future direction is required.

International Journal for Scientific ResearchVol. 4(7)
Imperial College London (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Esophageal and GI Pathology
2.01
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.