BACKGROUND AND AIM: We earlier reported that mucosal defect involving over three-fourths of the circumference of the esophagus after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a risk factor for the development of the stricture. Although endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) is a useful procedure to relieve the stricture, there is no standard strategy for preventing development of the stricture. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of preventive EBD. METHODS: From 1993 to 2008, 41 consecutive patients with extensive mucosal defect involving over three-fourths of the esophageal circumference after EMR or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) were investigated. Preventive EBD was carried out for 29 cases within 1 week just after EMR/ESD and was repeated once a week until the mucosal defect was completely healed. The remaining 12 cases were not underwent preventive EBD and used as a historic control. If postEMR/ESD stricture developed regardless of preventive EBD, conventional EBD was given repeatedly until the stricture was completely relieved. RESULTS: Preventive EBD decreased the incidence of stricture (59% vs. 92%, P =0.04), reduced the severity of stricture [(≤2 mm; >2 mm and ≤5 mm; >5 mm)=(1; 2; 14) vs. (4; 4; 3), P = 0.01] and shortened the duration required for resolving the stricture (29 d vs. 78 d, P =0.04) even when stricture developed. There was no complication associated with preventive EBD procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Preventive EBD is an effective procedure to prevent postEMR/ESD stricture. Preventive EBD should be considered when EMR/ESD results in a mucosal defect with a circumference greater than three-fourths of the esophageal lumen.
BACKGROUND AND AIM: We earlier reported that mucosal defect involving over three-fourths of the circumference of the esophagus after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a risk factor for the development of the stricture. Although endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) is a useful procedure to relieve the stricture, there is no standard strategy for preventing development of the stricture. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of preventive EBD. METHODS: From 1993 to 2008, 41 consecutive patients with extensive mucosal defect involving over three-fourths of the esophageal circumference after EMR or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) were investigated. Preventive EBD was carried out for 29 cases within 1 week just after EMR/ESD and was repeated once a week until the mucosal defect was completely healed. The remaining 12 cases were not underwent preventive EBD and used as a historic control. If postEMR/ESD stricture developed regardless of preventive EBD, conventional EBD was given repeatedly until the stricture was completely relieved. RESULTS: Preventive EBD decreased the incidence of stricture (59% vs. 92%, P =0.04), reduced the severity of stricture [(≤2 mm; >2 mm and ≤5 mm; >5 mm)=(1; 2; 14) vs. (4; 4; 3), P = 0.01] and shortened the duration required for resolving the stricture (29 d vs. 78 d, P =0.04) even when stricture developed. There was no complication associated with preventive EBD procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Preventive EBD is an effective procedure to prevent postEMR/ESD stricture. Preventive EBD should be considered when EMR/ESD results in a mucosal defect with a circumference greater than three-fourths of the esophageal lumen.
Authors: Eduard Jonas; Sebastian Sjöqvist; Peter Elbe; Nobuo Kanai; Jenny Enger; Stephan L Haas; Ammar Mohkles-Barakat; Teruo Okano; Ryo Takagi; Takeshi Ohki; Masakazu Yamamoto; Makoto Kondo; Katrin Markland; Mei Ling Lim; Masayuki Yamato; Magnus Nilsson; Johan Permert; Pontus Blomberg; J-Matthias Löhr Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2016-02-19 Impact factor: 4.623