Review Article
Page 1 of 6
Surgical treatment of Zenker diverticula
Venanzio Porziella, Edoardo Zanfrini, Diomira Tabacco, Luca Pogliani, Maria Letizia Vita,
Leonardo Petracca-Ciavarella, Elisa Meacci, Maria Teresa Congedo, Marco Chiappetta,
Stefano Margaritora, Dania Nachira
Department of General Thoracic Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli”, IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome,
Italy
Contributions: (I) Conception and design: V Porziella, D Nachira; (II) Administrative support: D Nachira, V Porziella, S Margaritora; (III) Provision
of study materials or patients: E Zanfrini, L Petracca-Ciavarella, E Zanfrini, D Tabacco, L Pogliani; (IV) Collection and assembly of data: D Nachira,
V Porziella, L Petracca-Ciavarella, E Zanfrini, D Tabacco, L Pogliani; (V) Data analysis and interpretation: D Nachira, V Porziella; (VI) Manuscript
writing: All authors; (VII) Final approval of manuscript: All authors.
Correspondence to: Dania Nachira, MD. Department of General Thoracic Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli”, IRCCS,
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo A. Gemelli, 800135, Rome, Italy. Email: danynac@libero.it.
Abstract: Zenker diverticula are due to a disorder in the opening of the upper oesophageal sphincter,
causing the protrusion of mucosa through the posterior pharyngoesophageal wall. The incidence of Zenker
diverticula is estimated between 0.01% and 0.11% and classically occur in males and the elderly. Therapeutic
management of the patient with Zenker diverticulum is fundamentally influenced by the presence or
absence of symptoms, the size and location of the diverticulum. Operative treatment should be reserved
only for symptomatic patients and for large diverticula (>2 cm), in order to improve the quality of life and
avoid complications. For many decades, Zenker diverticula was treated with an open surgical approach.
Traditionally, surgical management has been the mainstay of treatment, but endoscopic approach has now
become accepted as a viable minimally invasive treatment option with a lower rate of complications. The
resolution of symptoms with the open approach is estimated in 93–95% of cases and the relapse rate is
2.9%. Compared with endoscopic treatments, the morbidity and mortality rates are higher. In this paper we
reviewed the current literature on surgical approach to Zenker’s diverticula in terms of clinical results and
complications rate.
Keywords: Esophagus; Zenker diverticulum; surgery
Received: 22 December 2020. Accepted: 01 April 2021.
doi: 10.21037/aoe-2020-25
View this article at: http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/aoe-2020-25
Introduction
The first description of a Zenker diverticulum (ZD) goes
back to 1769 by Ludlow (1). In 1887, a German pathologist,
Friedrich Albert Von Zenker recognized and better
characterized the pathophysiology of this illness and that
eponym has lasted ever since (2). Although a complete
understanding of the pathogenesis of the ZD has not yet
been achieved, it is generally accepted that the ZD is due to a
disorder in the opening of the upper oesophageal sphincter.
The onset of ZDs is related to an increase in intraluminal
pressure at the oropharynx during swallowing and insufficient
© Annals of Esophagus. All rights reserved.
release of the cricopharyngeal muscle resulting in incomplete
opening of the upper oesophageal sphincter, which causes the
mucosa to protrude through an area of relative weakness of
the posterior pharyngoesophageal wall (3). The incidence of
Zenker diverticula is estimated between 0.01% and 0.11% (4)
and classically occurs in males and the elderly, aged 70 to
80 years (5).
Therapeutic management of the patient with Zenker
diverticulum is fundamentally influenced by the presence
or absence of symptoms, the size and location of the
diverticulum. For asymptomatic diverticula smaller than
1 cm, conservative treatment with periodic radiological
Ann Esophagus 2021 | http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/aoe-2020-25
Page 2 of 6
Figure 1 Barium swallow: giant diverticula.
checks using esophagograms is indicated (6). Operative
treatment should be reserved only for symptomatic patients
and for large diverticula (>2 cm), in order to improve the
quality of life and avoid complications. Symptoms that
would induce a surgical approach to Zenker diverticulum
include episodes of aspiration pneumonia or inhalation
of food material in the airways, regurgitation of food,
dysphagia, dyspepsia, halitosis or a feeling of suffocation.
As reported by Shahawy et al. (7), in almost half of patients,
aspiration episodes are common.
Two main therapeutic approaches were described in the
treatment of this type of diverticula: surgical or endoscopic.
Historically, ZD was treated with open surgery (transcervical
diverticulectomy, diverticulopexy or diverticular inversion)
associated with a more or less extensive longitudinal
myotomy of the cricopharyngeal muscle (8,9). Endoscopic
approach can be performed using a rigid endoscope or
using a flexible instrument to divide the cricopharyngeal
muscle fibers forming the septum of the diverticulum and
to improve dysphagia and regurgitation. The endoscopic
technique was first used for patients in poor general
condition, not fit for open surgery or for whom it was
too difficult to obtain a good endoscopic exposure (10).
Furthermore, a submucosal tunnelling technique similar
to that used in per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has
recently been introduced to optimize septal visualization
and reduce complication rates. It has been called Z-POEM
(POEM for Zenker diverticulum) (11) or STESD
(Submucosal Tunnelling Endoscopic Septum Division) (12).
© Annals of Esophagus. All rights reserved.
Annals of Esophagus, 2021
A mucosal incision with muscular interruption also
known as the “MIMI” approach has been proposed as a
modification of the Z-POEM (13).
There is still an open debate on which of the two
approaches is best for the patient and how each of them carries
risks and benefits but, to our knowledge, no prospective
comparative studies were reported. Most of the relevant data
suggest that open surgery has a better clinical success rates
and a higher complication rate than the endoscopic treatment.
Major complications of surgery include damage to the
recurrent laryngeal nerve with possible subsequent paralysis
of the ipsilateral vocal cord and dysphonia (3%), leak or
perforation (3%) and surgical site infection which can in rare
cases lead to descending mediastinitis (<2%). The resolution of
symptoms with the open approach is approximately 93–95%
and the relapse rate of 2.9%. Compared with endoscopic
treatments, the morbidity and mortality rates were higher
(11% vs. 8.7% and 0.9% vs. 0.4% for the open and endoscopic
approach respectively) (14,15).
In this paper we reviewed current literature on surgical
approach to Zenker’s diverticula in terms of clinical results
and complications rate.
Preoperative evaluation
All patients with ZD must be subjected to a preoperative
morphological and functional study.
From the morphological point of view, a barium
esophagogram and an upper GI endoscopic study are
needed to, respectively, highlight the features of the
diverticulum (size, neck, barium retention, Figure 1) and
exclude the presence of ulcerations or possible neoplastic
lesions located in the pouch.
From a functional point of view, oesophageal manometry
easily reveals hyper tonus of the upper oesophageal
sphincter in all patients (Figure 2); however, the diverticular
pouch anteriorly displaced the true oesophageal lumen,
and it is not possible to perform oesophageal manometry
in all patients, because the manometric tube remains in
the pouch. Oesophageal scintigraphy with 99mTc, in these
patients, is ideal for examining the motility and speed
of peristalsis, stagnation of the tracer at the level of the
diverticular sac and a hyper tonus and/or achalasia of the
lower pharyngeal constrictor muscle.
The surgical approach
After induction of general anesthesia and endotracheal
Ann Esophagus 2021 | http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/aoe-2020-25
Annals of Esophagus, 2021
Figure 2 Manometry: high pressure of upper esophageal sphincter.
Figure 3 Stapler assisted diverticulectomy.
intubation, the patient’s neck shall be extended by placing a
small rolled sheet beneath the shoulders, turning the head
toward the right side.
Surgeons usually perform a J incision on the left side of
the neck parallel and anterior to the sternocleidomastoid
muscle and dissect the platysma and omohyoid muscles.
Then sternocleidomastoid muscle and carotid sheath are
retracted laterally and the trachea medially; in order to
identify and protect the laryngeal nerve, the middle thyroid
vein or inferior thyroid artery must be ligated and divided
as required. At this point, the esophagus and the fundus of
the diverticular pouch are visible.
Traditionally the surgical approach to the diverticulum
of Zenker provides two distinct aspects: the treatment of
the diverticular sac and the correction of the underlying
© Annals of Esophagus. All rights reserved.
Page 3 of 6
motor disorder. These are two times of the same
intervention, which are carried out based on anatomical,
pathophysiological, and functional criteria.
When the diverticulum is larger than 4 cm, it is advisable
to perform a resection, preferably after positioning a
vascular TA-30 surgical stapler, according to Orringer’s
technique (16). If diverticulum measures between 2 and
4 cm, can be suspended suturing it to the preverbal fascia
(diverticulopexy), or can be resected as described above.
When the pouch is smaller than 1 cm, there is no need for
a resection or suspension, because after cricopharyngeal
myotomy the small pouch disappears in the mucosal
protrusion through the margins of myotomy. Usually, after
resection, no reinforcement of the suture line is required.
Independent of the chosen treatment of the pouch, a
correct surgical approach of the Zenker diverticulum always
provides a complete myotomy of the crico-pharyngeal
muscle.
The crico-pharyngeal muscle is easily identifiable from
the endoscopic side, but its certain limits escape the surgeon’s
eye, especially when patient is under general anestesia and
cannot swallow. For this reason, Belsey (17), Orringer (16),
and Duranceau (18) separately suggested to perform a
myotomy up to 5.0 cm or longer, even if Hiebert (19),
in his experience with patients sedated but awake and able
to swallow, reported that a 2–3 cm myotomy is safe and very
effective.
In our 15-year experience (2004 to 2018) at the “A.
Gemelli” hospital (Fondazione A. Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic
University of Rome), we resected the diverticulum after
positioning a vascular TA-30 surgical stapler, according to
Orringer’s technique (16) (Figure 3) in 41/45 (91%) patients.
No reinforcement of the suture line was performed. The
mean dimension of the diverticula was 5.1±1.76 cm. We
didn’t perform a diverticulectomy in 4 cases (8,9%), because
of the small dimension of the diverticula. Myotomy was
performed in all patients and was extended for 5.57±1.56 cm
on the left posterolateral face of the esophagus (Figure 4).
A small tube is used to drain the wound. All diverticula
subjected to surgical excision were analysed at histological
examination and in 1 case (2%) an outbreak of carcinoma
in situ was found within the diverticular sac.
Results of the surgical treatment
The main outcome of ZD surgical treatment is the resolution
of symptoms, in particular of dysphagia. In their large reviews
on treatment of ZD, Verdonk and Morton (20) compared
Ann Esophagus 2021 | http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/aoe-2020-25
Page 4 of 6
Figure 4 Cricopharyngeal myotomy.
the functional results obtained from open surgery (1,990
patients) and endoscopic approach (1,089 patients) and
reported that transcervical surgery seemed to offer best results
in terms of resolution of dysphagia (95.8%), with a significant
lower rate of relapse than endoscopic procedures (4.2%
vs. 18.4%, P<0.001). Similarly, Albers and colleagues (14)
in their meta-analysis observed that in patients who
underwent endoscopic procedure (300 patients), the success
rate was 87%, but it was 96% when an open approach was
performed (296 patients).
Bhatt et al. (21) in their recent Systematic Review
and Network Meta-analysis studied a population of
903 patients arising from 9 cohort studies treated
with either laser-assisted diverticulectomy (n=283),
transcervical diverticulectomy (n=150), or stapler-assisted
diverticulectomy (n=470), calculating the Odd Ratio (OD)
for persistent or recurrent symptoms following surgery.
Open diverticulectomy with cricopharyngeal myotomy had
a statistically lower rate of relapse, persistent or recurrent
symptoms following treatment.
In our series, we observed only one patient (2.2%) still
complaining of a minimal dysphagia, which was resolved
thanks to speech therapist. There were no others episodes
of dysphagia or signs of relapse after 2 years. Therefore, the
treatment was immediately effective in 97.8% of patients,
according to papers previously mentioned.
On the other hand, from an endoscopic point of view, the
incidence of post-procedure complications was referred to be
higher for patients submitted to the open surgical technique.
The risks of transcervical treatment of Zenker’s
© Annals of Esophagus. All rights reserved.
Annals of Esophagus, 2021
diverticulum are partly inherent the more invasive surgical
procedure itself, and partly reside in the fact that this disease
often afflicts an elderly population. In these patients, even
the less severe complication can turns into an important,
adverse early or late event.
Mediastinitis, damage to the recurrent laryngeal
nerve an esophageal perforation (22) are the most feared
complications, but the most common are infections, probably
originating from the transfixing stiches of divericulopexy or
from the cutline at the neck of the pouch in diverticulectomy.
Moroco et al. (23), in their recent study of the NSQIP
Database, analyzed 614 elderly patients submitted to open
surgery for ZD, observing a complication rate of 6.7%,
readmission rate of 7.2%, and reoperation rate of 6.4%,
with a very low mortality rate of 0.3%. These data are
significantly better than the overall complication rate of
11% reported in previous studies (20,24). In our series,
we observed just one major complication (bleeding) in 45
surgical procedure (2.2%).
Despite the mean age of our patients (65.0±10.9 years)
and the inevitable comorbidity of the third age of life, we
did not observe any mortality and major complication
in our experience. Many studies confirmed our data,
demonstrating that peri- and postoperative outcomes are
independent of chronological age alone (25-27).
Surgery-related mortality, in the Verdonk and Morton
review (20), is low in either method (<0.9%); they reported
a morbidity rate of 11% for the transcervical approach
(especially hematomas, fistulas and recurrent laryngeal nerve
palsy) and 7% for the endoscopic procedures (mediastinitis
or subcutaneous emphysema mainly).
In a systematic review and meta-analysis, Howell et al. (28)
analyzed 865 patients (106 submitted to open surgery, 310
endoscopic laser procedures, and 449 to endoscopic staplerassisted technique) obtained from 11 studies. Endoscopic
stapler-assisted diverticulectomy showed a lower
complication rates but a higher reoperation rate.
Open approach after previous and unsatisfactory
endoscopic approach can be inquisitive, but feasible.
Contrariwise, endoscopic redo management can be
particularly challenging (29,30). Diverticula bigger than
5 cm, in our opinion, need an open surgical approach.
The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
(ESGE) also recommends that emerging treatments for
Zenker’s diverticulum, such as Zenker’s peroral endoscopic
myotomy (Z-POEM) and tunnelling, must be considered
as experimental; these treatments should be offered in a
research setting only (30).
Ann Esophagus 2021 | http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/aoe-2020-25
Annals of Esophagus, 2021
Conclusions
There is still an open debate on the best approach for
treatment of patients affected by ZD, in terms of risks and
benefits.
Open approach seems to be a safe, feasible, and effective
option to improve dysphagia and regurgitation, with a
very small rate of complications, despite the mean age of
the patients. Waiting for prospective comparative studies
between surgery and endoscopic treatment, in our opinion,
it is mandatory to perform the best choice of treatment
according to clinical characteristics of each patient. For
big diverticula o redo-surgery after endoscopic failure,
open surgery still remains the first choice. In all the other
cases, decision must be taken on the base of some factors:
comorbidity of the patient, surgical risk, surgeon experience
and endoscopist skills.
In the hands of experienced surgeons, major complication
rates for this technique can be very low.
Acknowledgments
Funding: None.
Footnote
Provenance and Peer Review: This article was commissioned
by the editorial office, Annals of Esophagus for the series
“Management of Esophageal Perforations and Injuries and
Other Benign Diseases”. The article has undergone the
external peer review.
Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE
uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.
org/10.21037/aoe-2020-25). The series “Management of
Esophageal Perforations and Injuries and Other Benign
Diseases” was commissioned by the editorial office without
any funding or sponsorship. VP served as an unpaid Guest
Editor of the series. DN served as an unpaid Guest Editor
of the series and serves as an unpaid editorial board member
of Annals of Esophagus from Oct 2019 to Sept 2021. The
authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare.
Ethical Statement: All authors are accountable for all
aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related
to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are
appropriately investigated and resolved.
© Annals of Esophagus. All rights reserved.
Page 5 of 6
Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article
distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International
License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the noncommercial replication and distribution of the article with
the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the
original work is properly cited (including links to both the
formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license).
See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
References
1.
Ludlow A. A case of obstructed deglutition from a
preternatural dilatation of, and bag formed in, the pharynx.
Med Observ Enq 1769;3:85-101.
2. Zenker FA, Ziemssen H. Krankheiten des Oesophagus.
In: Ziemssen H, editor. Handbuch der speciale Pathologie
und Therapie. Leipzig, Germany: FC Vogel, 1877:1-87.
3. Cook IJ, Gabb M, Panagopoulos V, et al. Pharyngeal
(Zenker's) diverticulum is a disorder of upper esophageal
sphincter opening. Gastroenterology 1992;103:1229-35.
4. Watemberg S, Landau O, Avrahami R. Zenker's
diverticulum: reappraisal. Am J Gastroenterol
1996;91:1494-8.
5. Maran AGD, Wilson JA, Al Muhanna AH. Pharyngeal
diverticula. Clin Otolaryngol 1986;11:219-25.
6. Bizzotto A, Iacopini F, Landi R, et al. Zenker’s
diverticulum: exploring treatment options. Acta
Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2013;33:219-29.
7. Shahawy S, Janisiewicz AM, Annino D, Shapiro J.
A comparative study of outcomes for endoscopic
diverticulectomy versus external diverticulectomy.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2014;151:646-51.
8. Payne WS. The treatment of pharyngoesophageal
diverticulum: the simple and complex.
Hepatogastroenterology 1992;39:109-14.
9. Aly A, Devitt PG, Jamieson GG. Evolution of surgical
treatment for pharyngeal pouch. Br J Surg 2004;91:657-64.
10. Yuan Y, Zhao YF, Hu Y, et al. Surgical treatment of
Zenker’s Diverticulum. Dig Surg 2013;30:207-18.
11. Ebrahim A, Leeds SG, Clothier JS, et al. Zenker’s
diverticulum treated via per-oral endoscopic myotomy.
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) 2020;33:233-4.
12. Li QL, Chen WF, Zhang XC, et al. Submucosal Tunneling
Endoscopic Septum Division: A Novel Technique for
Treating Zenker’s Diverticulum. Gastroenterology
Ann Esophagus 2021 | http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/aoe-2020-25
Page 6 of 6
2016;151:1071-4.
13. Klingler MJ, Landreneau JP, Strong AT, et al. Endoscopic
mucosal incision and muscle interruption (MIMI) for the
treatment of Zenker’s diverticulum. Surg Endosc 2020.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07861-5. [Epub ahead of print].
14. Albers DV, Kondo A, Bernardo WM, et al. Endoscopic
versus surgical approach in the treatment of Zenker’s
diverticulum: systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc
Int Open 2016;4:E678-86.
15. Ishaq S, Hassan C, Antonello A et al. Flexible endoscopic
treatment for Zenker’s diverticulum: A systematic review and
meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2016;83:1076-89.e5.
16. Orringer MB. Extended cervical esophagomyotomy for
cricopharyngeal dysfunction. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
1980;80:669-78.
17. Belsey R. Functional disease of the esophagus. J Thorac
Cardiovasc Surg 1966;52:164-88.
18. Duranceau AC, Jamieson GG, Beauchamp G. The
technique of cricopharyngeal myotomy. Surg Clin North
Am 1983;63:833-9.
19. Hiebert CA. Surgery for cricopharyngeal dysfunction
under local anesthesia. Am J Surg 1976;131:423-7.
20. Verdonck J, Morton RP. Systematic review on treatment
of Zenker’s diverticulum. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol
2015;272:3095-107.
21. Bhatt NK, Mendoza J, Kaoolgjeri D, et al. Comparison
of Surgical Treatments for Zenker Diverticulum - A
Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. JAMA
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2021;147:190-6.
22. Shaari CM, Buchbinder D, Costantino PD, et al.
Complications of microvascular head and neck surgery
in the elderly. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
Annals of Esophagus, 2021
1998;124:407-11.
23. Moroco AE, Saadi RA, Patel VA, et al. 30-Day
Postoperative Outcomes Following Transcervical Zenker’s
Diverticulectomy in the Elderly: Analysis of the NSQIP
Database. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2020. doi:
10.1177/0194599820970503. [Epub ahead of print].
24. Mady LJ, Nilsen ML, Johnson JT. Head and neck cancer
in the elderly: frailty, shared decisions, and avoidance of
low value care. Clin Geriatr Med 2018;34:233-44.
25. Chow WB, Rosenthal RA, Merkow RP, et al. Optimal
preoperative assessment of the geriatric surgical patient:
a best practices guideline from the American College
of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement
Program and the American Geriatrics Society. J Am Coll
Surg 2012;215:453-66.
26. Milet PR, Mallet Y, El Bedoui S, et al. Head and neck
cancer surgery in the elderly—does age influence the
postoperative course? Oral Oncol 2010;46:92-5.
27. McGuirt WF, Davis SP. Demographic portrayal and
outcome analysis of head and neck cancer surgery in the
elderly. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;121:150-4.
28. Howell RJ, Giliberto JP, Harmon J, et al. Open Versus
Endoscopic Surgery of Zenker’s Diverticula: A Systematic
Review and Meta‐analysis. Dysphagia 2019;34:930-8.
29. Weusten BLAM, Barret M, Bredenoord AJ, et al.
Endoscopic management of gastrointestinal motility
disorders - part 2: European Society of Gastrointestinal
Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy 2020;52:600-14.
30. Costamagna G, Iacopini F, Bizzotto A, et al. Prognostic
variables for the clinical success of flexible endoscopic
septostomy of Zenker’s diverticulum. Gastrointest Endosc
2016;83:765-73.
doi: 10.21037/aoe-2020-25
Cite this article as: Porziella V, Zanfrini E, Tabacco D,
Pogliani L, Vita ML, Petracca-Ciavarella L, Meacci E,
Congedo MT, Chiappetta M, Margaritora S, Nachira D.
Surgical treatment of Zenker diverticula. Ann Esophagus 2021.
© Annals of Esophagus. All rights reserved.
Ann Esophagus 2021 | http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/aoe-2020-25