Long-term management of tight, benign esophageal strictures

H. M. Perez-Arroyo, John Wo, J. P. Waring

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Intro: Most guidelines on esophageal dilation deal with performance of the procedure. There is limited information regarding principles of long-term management (i.e. dilation interval, long-term goals, etc). This may be troublesome for patients with persistent or severe strictures. Aim: To review our experience with patients who have tight, benign strictures. Methods: Tight esophageal strictures were defined as those obstructing the passage of a 9.8 mm endoscope. 37 such patients were referred to our institution from January 1992 to November 1995. During each session, the final dilator passed was 6-10 Fr beyond the initial size meeting resistance. Subsequent sessions were performed frequently (q 1-3 weeks) until an adequate size was reached (approx. 45F), and then the interval was increased as tolerated. Wire-guided Savary-type dilators were used for tight, tortuous strictures. Maloney dilators were used in 14 patients when a 36 Fr dilator could be easily passed at the beginning of the session. All GERD patients were treated with high-dose H2 blockers or omeprazole. 10 patients received intra-lesional steroid injection when no progress was made with the initial sessions. Comparisons were made with the students t-test. Results: 16 patients had GERD, 11 had post-surgical or anastomotic strictures and 10 had other etiologies including Schatzki's ring, pill-induced, radiation injury and caustic ingestion. The 37 pts had 300 sessions (mean 8.1, range 1-33). The mean follow-up was 13 months (range 1-46 months). Table 1 displays mean dilator size (Fr) at the initial and final session, and the mean time between first 3 and last 3 dilation sessions (weeks). TABLE 1: Initial Size Final Size Initial Interval Final Interval All patients* 26.5 45.3 5.9 26.0 GERD pts* 28.3 45.5 7.3 35.9 Post-op pts* 23.7 46.1 4.7 24.1 * p <0.0001 comparing initial vs final dilation size, and initial vs final dilation interval. There were no significant differences between groups. 3 patients had anti-reflux surgery after dysphagia resolved (one required post-op dilation). 3 patients with anastomotic strictures had surger, 2 for refractory dysphagia (both of whom continue to require dilations) and 1 for suspected (but unproven) perforation. Conclusions: Most patients with tight, benign esophageal strictures have excellent long-term results following techniques outlined above.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)342
Number of pages1
JournalGastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume43
Issue number4
StatePublished - 1996
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Esophageal Stenosis
Dilatation
Pathologic Constriction
Gastroesophageal Reflux
Deglutition Disorders
Caustics
Radiation Injuries
Omeprazole
Endoscopes
Eating
Steroids
Guidelines

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Long-term management of tight, benign esophageal strictures. / Perez-Arroyo, H. M.; Wo, John; Waring, J. P.

In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Vol. 43, No. 4, 1996, p. 342.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Perez-Arroyo, HM, Wo, J & Waring, JP 1996, 'Long-term management of tight, benign esophageal strictures', Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 342.
Perez-Arroyo, H. M. ; Wo, John ; Waring, J. P. / Long-term management of tight, benign esophageal strictures. In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 1996 ; Vol. 43, No. 4. pp. 342.
@article{dd537cea20a9431eadcd4c1b455eb4ec,
title = "Long-term management of tight, benign esophageal strictures",
abstract = "Intro: Most guidelines on esophageal dilation deal with performance of the procedure. There is limited information regarding principles of long-term management (i.e. dilation interval, long-term goals, etc). This may be troublesome for patients with persistent or severe strictures. Aim: To review our experience with patients who have tight, benign strictures. Methods: Tight esophageal strictures were defined as those obstructing the passage of a 9.8 mm endoscope. 37 such patients were referred to our institution from January 1992 to November 1995. During each session, the final dilator passed was 6-10 Fr beyond the initial size meeting resistance. Subsequent sessions were performed frequently (q 1-3 weeks) until an adequate size was reached (approx. 45F), and then the interval was increased as tolerated. Wire-guided Savary-type dilators were used for tight, tortuous strictures. Maloney dilators were used in 14 patients when a 36 Fr dilator could be easily passed at the beginning of the session. All GERD patients were treated with high-dose H2 blockers or omeprazole. 10 patients received intra-lesional steroid injection when no progress was made with the initial sessions. Comparisons were made with the students t-test. Results: 16 patients had GERD, 11 had post-surgical or anastomotic strictures and 10 had other etiologies including Schatzki's ring, pill-induced, radiation injury and caustic ingestion. The 37 pts had 300 sessions (mean 8.1, range 1-33). The mean follow-up was 13 months (range 1-46 months). Table 1 displays mean dilator size (Fr) at the initial and final session, and the mean time between first 3 and last 3 dilation sessions (weeks). TABLE 1: Initial Size Final Size Initial Interval Final Interval All patients* 26.5 45.3 5.9 26.0 GERD pts* 28.3 45.5 7.3 35.9 Post-op pts* 23.7 46.1 4.7 24.1 * p <0.0001 comparing initial vs final dilation size, and initial vs final dilation interval. There were no significant differences between groups. 3 patients had anti-reflux surgery after dysphagia resolved (one required post-op dilation). 3 patients with anastomotic strictures had surger, 2 for refractory dysphagia (both of whom continue to require dilations) and 1 for suspected (but unproven) perforation. Conclusions: Most patients with tight, benign esophageal strictures have excellent long-term results following techniques outlined above.",
author = "Perez-Arroyo, {H. M.} and John Wo and Waring, {J. P.}",
year = "1996",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
pages = "342",
journal = "Gastrointestinal Endoscopy",
issn = "0016-5107",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Long-term management of tight, benign esophageal strictures

AU - Perez-Arroyo, H. M.

AU - Wo, John

AU - Waring, J. P.

PY - 1996

Y1 - 1996

N2 - Intro: Most guidelines on esophageal dilation deal with performance of the procedure. There is limited information regarding principles of long-term management (i.e. dilation interval, long-term goals, etc). This may be troublesome for patients with persistent or severe strictures. Aim: To review our experience with patients who have tight, benign strictures. Methods: Tight esophageal strictures were defined as those obstructing the passage of a 9.8 mm endoscope. 37 such patients were referred to our institution from January 1992 to November 1995. During each session, the final dilator passed was 6-10 Fr beyond the initial size meeting resistance. Subsequent sessions were performed frequently (q 1-3 weeks) until an adequate size was reached (approx. 45F), and then the interval was increased as tolerated. Wire-guided Savary-type dilators were used for tight, tortuous strictures. Maloney dilators were used in 14 patients when a 36 Fr dilator could be easily passed at the beginning of the session. All GERD patients were treated with high-dose H2 blockers or omeprazole. 10 patients received intra-lesional steroid injection when no progress was made with the initial sessions. Comparisons were made with the students t-test. Results: 16 patients had GERD, 11 had post-surgical or anastomotic strictures and 10 had other etiologies including Schatzki's ring, pill-induced, radiation injury and caustic ingestion. The 37 pts had 300 sessions (mean 8.1, range 1-33). The mean follow-up was 13 months (range 1-46 months). Table 1 displays mean dilator size (Fr) at the initial and final session, and the mean time between first 3 and last 3 dilation sessions (weeks). TABLE 1: Initial Size Final Size Initial Interval Final Interval All patients* 26.5 45.3 5.9 26.0 GERD pts* 28.3 45.5 7.3 35.9 Post-op pts* 23.7 46.1 4.7 24.1 * p <0.0001 comparing initial vs final dilation size, and initial vs final dilation interval. There were no significant differences between groups. 3 patients had anti-reflux surgery after dysphagia resolved (one required post-op dilation). 3 patients with anastomotic strictures had surger, 2 for refractory dysphagia (both of whom continue to require dilations) and 1 for suspected (but unproven) perforation. Conclusions: Most patients with tight, benign esophageal strictures have excellent long-term results following techniques outlined above.

AB - Intro: Most guidelines on esophageal dilation deal with performance of the procedure. There is limited information regarding principles of long-term management (i.e. dilation interval, long-term goals, etc). This may be troublesome for patients with persistent or severe strictures. Aim: To review our experience with patients who have tight, benign strictures. Methods: Tight esophageal strictures were defined as those obstructing the passage of a 9.8 mm endoscope. 37 such patients were referred to our institution from January 1992 to November 1995. During each session, the final dilator passed was 6-10 Fr beyond the initial size meeting resistance. Subsequent sessions were performed frequently (q 1-3 weeks) until an adequate size was reached (approx. 45F), and then the interval was increased as tolerated. Wire-guided Savary-type dilators were used for tight, tortuous strictures. Maloney dilators were used in 14 patients when a 36 Fr dilator could be easily passed at the beginning of the session. All GERD patients were treated with high-dose H2 blockers or omeprazole. 10 patients received intra-lesional steroid injection when no progress was made with the initial sessions. Comparisons were made with the students t-test. Results: 16 patients had GERD, 11 had post-surgical or anastomotic strictures and 10 had other etiologies including Schatzki's ring, pill-induced, radiation injury and caustic ingestion. The 37 pts had 300 sessions (mean 8.1, range 1-33). The mean follow-up was 13 months (range 1-46 months). Table 1 displays mean dilator size (Fr) at the initial and final session, and the mean time between first 3 and last 3 dilation sessions (weeks). TABLE 1: Initial Size Final Size Initial Interval Final Interval All patients* 26.5 45.3 5.9 26.0 GERD pts* 28.3 45.5 7.3 35.9 Post-op pts* 23.7 46.1 4.7 24.1 * p <0.0001 comparing initial vs final dilation size, and initial vs final dilation interval. There were no significant differences between groups. 3 patients had anti-reflux surgery after dysphagia resolved (one required post-op dilation). 3 patients with anastomotic strictures had surger, 2 for refractory dysphagia (both of whom continue to require dilations) and 1 for suspected (but unproven) perforation. Conclusions: Most patients with tight, benign esophageal strictures have excellent long-term results following techniques outlined above.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=24544469793&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=24544469793&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:24544469793

VL - 43

SP - 342

JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

SN - 0016-5107

IS - 4

ER -