OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of stricturoplasty and endoscopic balloon dilatation in the treatment for ileal pouch strictures. METHOD: Consecutive inflammatory bowel disease patients with pouch strictures seen at our Pouch Center from 2002 to 2012 were studied. The efficacy and safety of stricturoplasty (vs. endoscopic balloon dilation) were evaluated with both univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients met the inclusion criteria, including 16 (9.6 %) with surgical stricturoplasty and 151 (90.4 %) with endoscopic balloon dilation. Ninety-four patients (56.3 %) were male, with a mean age at the diagnosis of pouch stricture of 41.6 ± 13.2 years. Fifty-one patients (30.5 %) had multiple pouch strictures, while 100 (59.9 %) patients had strictures at the pouch inlet. The mean length of pouch strictures was 1.2 ± 0.6 cm. No difference was found between the stricturoplasty and endoscopic dilation groups in clinicopathological variables, except for the degree of strictures (p = 0.019). After a mean follow-up of 4.1 ± 2.6 years, pouch stricture recurred in 92 patients (55.1 %) and 21 (12.6 %) patients developed pouch failure. The time interval between the procedure and pouch stricture recurrence or pouch failure was longer in the stricturoplasty group than that in the endoscopic dilation group (p < 0.001). Patients in the two groups had similar overall pouch survival rates and stricture-free survival rates. In the multivariate analysis, stricturoplasty vs. endoscopic dilation was not significantly associated with either overall pouch survival or stricture-free survival. There was no difference in the procedure-associated complication rates between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Surgical stricturoplasty and endoscopic dilation treatment are complimentary techniques for pouch strictures. Repeated endoscopic dilatations are often required, while surgical stricturoplasty appeared to yield a longer time interval to stricture recurrence or pouch failure.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of stricturoplasty and endoscopic balloon dilatation in the treatment for ileal pouch strictures. METHOD: Consecutive inflammatory bowel diseasepatients with pouch strictures seen at our Pouch Center from 2002 to 2012 were studied. The efficacy and safety of stricturoplasty (vs. endoscopic balloon dilation) were evaluated with both univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients met the inclusion criteria, including 16 (9.6 %) with surgical stricturoplasty and 151 (90.4 %) with endoscopic balloon dilation. Ninety-four patients (56.3 %) were male, with a mean age at the diagnosis of pouch stricture of 41.6 ± 13.2 years. Fifty-one patients (30.5 %) had multiple pouch strictures, while 100 (59.9 %) patients had strictures at the pouch inlet. The mean length of pouch strictures was 1.2 ± 0.6 cm. No difference was found between the stricturoplasty and endoscopic dilation groups in clinicopathological variables, except for the degree of strictures (p = 0.019). After a mean follow-up of 4.1 ± 2.6 years, pouch stricture recurred in 92 patients (55.1 %) and 21 (12.6 %) patients developed pouch failure. The time interval between the procedure and pouch stricture recurrence or pouch failure was longer in the stricturoplasty group than that in the endoscopic dilation group (p < 0.001). Patients in the two groups had similar overall pouch survival rates and stricture-free survival rates. In the multivariate analysis, stricturoplasty vs. endoscopic dilation was not significantly associated with either overall pouch survival or stricture-free survival. There was no difference in the procedure-associated complication rates between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Surgical stricturoplasty and endoscopic dilation treatment are complimentary techniques for pouch strictures. Repeated endoscopic dilatations are often required, while surgical stricturoplasty appeared to yield a longer time interval to stricture recurrence or pouch failure.
Authors: A Ferlitsch; W Reinisch; A Püspök; C Dejaco; M Schillinger; R Schöfl; R Pötzi; A Gangl; H Vogelsang Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Bo Shen; Victor W Fazio; Feza H Remzi; Ana E Bennett; Ian C Lavery; Rocio Lopez; Aaron Brezinski; Kerry K Sherman; Marlene L Bambrick; Bret A Lashner Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 4.585