Min Chen1, Bo Shen. 1. *Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio; and †Department of Gastroenterology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The response of Crohn's disease (CD) stricture to endoscopic therapy compared with non-CD stricture is unknown. Our aim was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of endoscopic management of those strictures. METHODS:All eligible patients with benign non-CD strictures who underwent the endoscopic balloon dilation between January 2002 and September 2013 were included. Patients with CD strictures were randomly selected with a ratio (CD versus non-CD strictures) of 2:1. RESULTS:A total of 90 patients were included, including 30 (33.3%) with non-CD strictures and 60 (66.7%) with CD strictures. Patients with CD strictures were younger than those with non-CD strictures at the time of disease diagnosis (25.8 ± 11.1 versus 50.5 ± 17.5; P < 0.001) and at the time of the first dilation (43.9 ± 12.4 versus 55.8 ± 13.9; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in characteristics of strictures and their endoscopic treatments between the CD and non-CD groups, except for the percentage of patients who were ever treated with intralesional corticosteroid injection (25.0% versus 6.7%, P = 0.046). Patients in the 2 groups had similar technical success rates (94.0% versus 93.9%, P = 1.00). Few patients in CD stricture group required emergency room visits due to obstructive symptoms from recurrence of disease (1.7% versus 16.7%, P = 0.02). There were on procedure-related complications in either of the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety of endoscopic balloon dilation in the treatment of CD and non-CD strictures seemed to be comparable.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The response of Crohn's disease (CD) stricture to endoscopic therapy compared with non-CD stricture is unknown. Our aim was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of endoscopic management of those strictures. METHODS: All eligible patients with benign non-CD strictures who underwent the endoscopic balloon dilation between January 2002 and September 2013 were included. Patients with CD strictures were randomly selected with a ratio (CD versus non-CD strictures) of 2:1. RESULTS: A total of 90 patients were included, including 30 (33.3%) with non-CD strictures and 60 (66.7%) with CD strictures. Patients with CD strictures were younger than those with non-CD strictures at the time of disease diagnosis (25.8 ± 11.1 versus 50.5 ± 17.5; P < 0.001) and at the time of the first dilation (43.9 ± 12.4 versus 55.8 ± 13.9; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in characteristics of strictures and their endoscopic treatments between the CD and non-CD groups, except for the percentage of patients who were ever treated with intralesional corticosteroid injection (25.0% versus 6.7%, P = 0.046). Patients in the 2 groups had similar technical success rates (94.0% versus 93.9%, P = 1.00). Few patients in CD stricture group required emergency room visits due to obstructive symptoms from recurrence of disease (1.7% versus 16.7%, P = 0.02). There were on procedure-related complications in either of the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety of endoscopic balloon dilation in the treatment of CD and non-CD strictures seemed to be comparable.