Literature DB >> 29417586

Office-based esophageal dilation in head and neck cancer: Safety, feasibility, and cost analysis.

Rebecca J Howell1, Melissa A Schopper1, John Paul Giliberto1, Ryan M Collar1, Sid M Khosla1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To review experience, safety, and cost of office-based esophageal dilation in patients with history of head and neck cancer (HNCA).
METHODS: The medical records of patients undergoing esophageal dilation in the office were retrospectively reviewed between August 2015 and May 2017. Patients were given nasal topical anesthesia. Next, a transnasal esophagoscopy (TNE) was performed. If the patient tolerated TNE, we proceeded with esophageal dilation using Seldinger technique with the CRE™ Boston Scientific (Boston Scientific Corp., Marlborough, MA) balloon system. Patients were discharged directly from the outpatient clinic.
RESULTS: Forty-seven dilations were performed in 22 patients with an average of 2.1 dilations/patient (range 1-10, standard deviation [SD] ± 2.2). Seventeen patients (77%) were male. The average age was 67 years (range 35-78 years, SD ± 8.5). The most common primary site of cancer was oral cavity/oropharynx (n = 10), followed by larynx (n = 6). All patients (100%) had history of radiation treatment. Four patients were postlaryngectomy. The indication for esophageal dilation was esophageal stricture and progressive dysphagia. All dilations occurred in the proximal esophagus. There were no major complications. Three focal, superficial lacerations occurred. Two patients experienced mild, self-limited epistaxis. One dilation was poorly tolerated due to discomfort. One patient required pain medication postprocedure. Office-based esophageal dilation generated $15,000 less in health system charges compared to traditional operating room dilation on average per episode of care.
CONCLUSION: In patients with history of HNCA and radiation, office-based TNE with esophageal dilation appears safe, well-tolerated, and cost-effective. In a small cohort, the technique has low complication rate and is feasible in an otolaryngology outpatient office setting. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. Laryngoscope, 128:2261-2267, 2018.
© 2018 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Radiation-induced esophageal stricture; head and neck cancer; office-based esophageal dilation; transnasal esophagoscopy

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29417586     DOI: 10.1002/lary.27121

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Laryngoscope        ISSN: 0023-852X            Impact factor:   3.325


  2 in total

1.  Meta-analysis of primary open versus closed cannulation strategy for totally implantable venous access port implantation.

Authors:  Ulla Klaiber; Pascal Probst; Matthes Hackbusch; Katrin Jensen; Colette Dörr-Harim; Felix J Hüttner; Thilo Hackert; Markus K Diener; Markus W Büchler; Phillip Knebel
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2021-01-09       Impact factor: 3.445

2.  Feasibility and Safety of Office-Based Transnasal Balloon Dilation for Neopharyngeal and Proximal Esophageal Strictures in Patients with a History of Head and Neck Carcinoma.

Authors:  Anouk S Schimberg; David J Wellenstein; Henrieke W Schutte; J Honings; Henri A M Marres; Robert P Takes; Guido B van den Broek
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 3.438

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.