Kozarek R A, Botoman V A, Patterson D J
Section of Gastroenterology, Virginia Mason Clinic, Seattle, Washington 98111.
Gastrointest Endosc. 1990 Nov-Dec;36(6):558-61. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(90)71163-7.
Although balloon dilation for gastric outlet obstruction has supplanted vagotomy plus drainage or resective therapy in some institutions, there are no long-term data which demonstrate what percentage of patients ultimately requires surgical intervention. Of 23 evaluable patients treated with hydrostatic balloon dilation in our institution, 70% were asymptomatic at a mean follow-up of 2.5 years. Five patients required surgery--one for acute perforation and the other four for symptoms of continued obstruction, despite one to three additional attempts at dilation. Only three of seven patients with previous gastric resection had a satisfactory long-term result. Whereas endoscopic therapy initially cost one tenth to one fifth that of surgical intervention, such figures do not factor for loss of productivity, on the one hand, or potential need for chronic H2 blockade, on the other. Despite instruction to the contrary, only 6 of 15 (40%) active patients continue acid-suppressive therapy. We conclude that balloon dilation remains a viable alternative for selected patients with gastric outlet obstruction.
尽管在一些机构中,球囊扩张术治疗胃出口梗阻已取代了迷走神经切断术加引流术或切除术,但尚无长期数据表明最终需要手术干预的患者比例。在我们机构接受水压球囊扩张术治疗的23例可评估患者中,平均随访2.5年时,70%无症状。5例患者需要手术——1例因急性穿孔,另外4例因尽管再次进行了一至三次扩张仍有持续梗阻症状。7例既往有胃切除术的患者中只有3例获得了满意的长期效果。虽然内镜治疗最初的费用仅为手术干预的十分之一至五分之一,但一方面这些数字未考虑生产力损失,另一方面也未考虑潜在的长期使用H2阻滞剂的需求。尽管有相反的指示,但15例活动患者中只有6例(40%)继续进行抑酸治疗。我们得出结论,球囊扩张术仍然是部分胃出口梗阻患者的可行选择。