We have located links that may give you full text access.
Large caliber empiric esophageal dilation results in sustained improvement for selected patients with non-obstructive dysphagia.
Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology 2024 April 11
INTRODUCTION: Empiric esophageal dilation (EED) remains a controversial practice for managing non-obstructive dysphagia (NOD) secondary to concerns about safety and efficacy. Here, we examine symptom response, presence of tissue disruption, and adverse events (AEs) after EED.
METHODS: We examined large caliber bougie EED for NOD at two tertiary referral centers: retrospectively evaluating for AEs. Esophageal manometry diagnoses were also reviewed. We then prospectively assessed EED's efficacy using the NIH Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) disrupted swallowing questionnaire to assess dysphagia at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-months after EED. Treatment success was defined by improvement in patient reported outcome score.
RESULTS: AE rate for large caliber dilation in the retrospective cohort of 180 patients undergoing EED for NOD was low (0.5% perforations, managed conservatively). Visible tissue disruption occurred in 18% of patients, with 47% occurring in the proximal esophagus. Obstructive motility disorders were found more frequently in patients with tissue disruption compared to those without (44% vs 14%, p=0.05).The primary outcome, the mean disrupted swallowing T-score was 60.1 ± 9.1 at baseline, 56.1 ± 9.5 at 1-month (p=0.03), 57 ± 9.6 at 3-months (p=0.10), and 56 ± 10, 6-months (p=0.02), (higher scores note more symptoms). EED resulted in a significant and durable improvement in dysphagia, and specifically solid food dysphagia among patients with tissue disruption.
DISCUSSION: EED is safe in solid food NOD and particularly effective when tissue disruption occurs. EED tissue disruption in NOD does not preclude esophageal dysmotility.
METHODS: We examined large caliber bougie EED for NOD at two tertiary referral centers: retrospectively evaluating for AEs. Esophageal manometry diagnoses were also reviewed. We then prospectively assessed EED's efficacy using the NIH Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) disrupted swallowing questionnaire to assess dysphagia at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-months after EED. Treatment success was defined by improvement in patient reported outcome score.
RESULTS: AE rate for large caliber dilation in the retrospective cohort of 180 patients undergoing EED for NOD was low (0.5% perforations, managed conservatively). Visible tissue disruption occurred in 18% of patients, with 47% occurring in the proximal esophagus. Obstructive motility disorders were found more frequently in patients with tissue disruption compared to those without (44% vs 14%, p=0.05).The primary outcome, the mean disrupted swallowing T-score was 60.1 ± 9.1 at baseline, 56.1 ± 9.5 at 1-month (p=0.03), 57 ± 9.6 at 3-months (p=0.10), and 56 ± 10, 6-months (p=0.02), (higher scores note more symptoms). EED resulted in a significant and durable improvement in dysphagia, and specifically solid food dysphagia among patients with tissue disruption.
DISCUSSION: EED is safe in solid food NOD and particularly effective when tissue disruption occurs. EED tissue disruption in NOD does not preclude esophageal dysmotility.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app