Comparison of the efficacy and complications of endoscopic incisional therapy and balloon dilatation for benign esophageal strictures

Abstract

Background Benign esophageal strictures are treated endoscopically, often with balloon dilatation (BD) or bougie dilators. However, recurrent esophageal strictures have been reported after BD, and severe complications sometimes occur. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and complications of endoscopic incisional therapy (EIT) and BD for benign esophageal strictures. Methods We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent BD or EIT as primary treatment for benign esophageal strictures between July 2014 and June 2021. Technical success was defined as restoration of the lumen diameter with <30% residual stenosis. Clinical success was defined as no recurrence of dysphagia within 1 month after BD or EIT and an increase of 1 grade or more on the Functional Oral Intake Scale. Results Thirty patients with benign esophageal stricture were enrolled. There were 16 patients in the BD group and 14 patients in the EIT group. No significant differences in technical and clinical success rates were found between the two groups. Furthermore, no significant differences in the re-stricture rate were observed between the groups. There was one complication in the EIT group and three complications in the BD group. Three patients who underwent BD had re-stricture and underwent EIT thereafter, and we regrouped patients who underwent EIT at least once. The clinical success rate was significantly higher in patients regrouped to the EIT group than in patients who underwent BD only. Conclusions EIT is not inferior to BD as the primary treatment for benign esophageal strictures, especially for recurrent cases.

Keywords

• endoscopy
• esophageal stricture
• esophagus