Endoscopic Stricturotomy Versus Balloon Dilation in the Treatment of Anastomotic Strictures in Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND

Current treatment modalities for anastomotic stricture in Crohn's disease (CD) include endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) and surgery. We recently published a case series of inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with the novel endoscopic stricturotomy (ES). The aim of this case-control study was to compare the efficacy and safety of ES versus conventional EBD in the treatment of anastomotic strictures in CD patients.

METHODS

All eligible patients with CD anastomotic stricture who were treated with ES or EBD were included. The primary outcomes were surgery-free survival and post-procedural complications.

RESULTS

A total of 185 patients were studied, including 21 treated with ES since 2009, and 164 treated with EBD since 1998. The immediate technical success after therapy was achieved in 100% of patients treated with ES and 89.5% of patients with EBD. Symptomatic and endoscopic improvement rates were higher in those treated with ES than EBD. Subsequent surgery was needed in 2 (9.5%) patients with ES and 55 (33.5%) with EBD (P = 0.03), during a median of 0.8 (interquartile range [IQR]:0.1-1.6) year and 4.0 (IQR: 0.8-6.9) years, respectively. Five procedure-associated perforation (1.1% per procedure) occurred in the EBD group and none in the ES group. In contrast, 4 procedure-associated, transfusion-required bleeding (8.8% per procedure) occurred in the ES group and none in the EBD group.

CONCLUSIONS

ES appears to be more effective in treating CD patients with anastomotic stricture than EBD. Although ES may have a lower risk for perforation, the procedure needs to be perfected to reduce its bleeding risk.