论文部分内容阅读
AIM To evaluate the safety and efficacy of upper esophageal sphincter(UES) dilatation for cricopharyngeal(CP) dysfunction. To determine if:(1) indication for dilatation; or(2) technique of dilatation correlated with symptom improvement.METHODS All balloon dilatations performed at our institution from over a 3-year period were retrospectively analyzed for demographics, indication and dilatation site. All dilatations involving the UES underwent further review to determine efficacy, complications, and factors that predict success. Dilatation technique was separated into static(stationary balloon distention) and retrograde(brusque pull-back of a fully distended balloon across the UES).RESULTS Four hundred and eighty-eight dilatations were reviewed. Thirty-one patients were identified who underwent UES dilatation. Median age was 63 years(range 27-81)and 55% of patients were male. Indications included dysphagia(28 patients), globus sensation with evidence of UES dysfunction(2 patients) and obstruction to echocardiography probe with cricopharyngeal(CP)bar(1 patient). There was evidence of concurrent oropharyngeal dysfunction in 16 patients(52%) and a small Zenker’s diverticula(≤ 2 cm) in 7 patients(23%). Dilator size ranged from 15 mm to 20 mm. Of the 31 patients, 11 had dilatation of other esophageal segments concurrently with UES dilatation and 20 had UES dilatation alone.Follow-up was available for 24 patients for a median of 2.5 mo(interquartile range 1-10 mo), of whom 19 reported symptomatic improvement(79%). For patients undergoing UES dilatation alone, follow-up was available for 15 patients, 12 of whom reported improvement(80%).Nineteen patients underwent retrograde dilatation(84%response) while 5 patients had static dilatation(60%response); however, there was no significant difference in symptom improvement between the techniques(P = 0.5).Successful symptom resolution was also not significantly affected by dilator size, oropharyngeal dysfunction,Zenker’s diverticulum, age or gender(P > 0.05). The only complication noted was uvular edema and a shallow ulcer after static dilatation in one patient, which resolved spontaneously and did not require hospital admission.CONCLUSION UES dilatation with a through-the-scope balloon by either static or retrograde technique is safe and effective for the treatment of dysphagia due to CP dysfunction. To our knowledge, this is the first study evaluating retrograde balloon dilatation of the UES.
AIM To evaluate the safety and efficacy of upper esophageal sphincter (UES) dilatation for cricopharyngeal (CP) dysfunction. To determine if: (1) indication for dilatation; or (2) technique of dilatation correlated with symptom improvement. METHODS All balloon dilatations performed at our institution from over a 3-year period were retrospectively analyzed for demographics, indication and dilatation site. All dilatations involving the UES underwent further review to determine efficacy, complications, and factors that predict success. Dilatation technique was separated into static distention) and retrograde (brusque pull-back of a fully distended balloon across the UES) .RESULTS Four hundred and eighty-eight dilatations were reviewed. Thirty-one patients were identified who underwent UES dilatation. Median age was 63 years (range 27- 81) and 55% of patients were male. Indications included dysphagia (28 patients), globus sensation with evidence of UES dysfunction (2 patients) and o There was evidence of concurrent oropharyngeal dysfunction in 16 patients (52%) and a small Zenker’s diverticula (≤ 2 cm) in 7 patients (23%). Dilator size ranged from 15 mm to 20 mm. Of the 31 patients, 11 had dilatation of other esophageal segments concurrently with UES dilatation and 20 had UES dilatation alone. Frolow-up was available for 24 patients for a median of 2.5 mo (interquartile range 1-10 For patients undergoing UDS dilatation alone, follow-up was available for 15 patients, 12 of whom reported improvement (80%). Nineteen patients underwent retrograde dilatation (84% response) while 5 patients had static dilatation (60% response); however, there was no significant difference in symptom improvement between the techniques (P = 0.5). Successive symptom resolution was also not significantly affected by dilator size, oropharyngeal dysfunction, Zenker’s diverti culum, age or gender (P> 0.05). The only complication was uvular edema and a shallow ulcer after static dilatation in one patient, which resolved spontaneously and did not require hospital admission .CONCLUSION UES dilatation with a through-the-scope balloon by either static or retrograde technique is safe and effective for the treatment of dysphagia due to CP dysfunction. To our knowledge, this is the first study evaluating retrograde balloon dilatation of the UES.