Martínek Jan, Juhas Stefan, Dolezel Radek, Walterová Barbora, Juhasova Jana, Klima Jiri, Rabekova Zuzana, Vacková Zuzana
Department of Hepatogastroenterology, IKEM, Prague, Czech Republic -
Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics AS CR, v.v.i, Libechov, Czech Republic -
Minerva Chir. 2018 Aug;73(4):394-409. doi: 10.23736/S0026-4733.18.07751-9. Epub 2018 May 24.
Endoscopic submucosal dissection or widespread endoscopic resection allow the radical removal of circumferential or near-circumferential neoplastic esophageal lesions. The advantage of these endoscopic methods is mini-invasivity and low risk of major adverse events compared to traditional esophagectomy. The major drawback of these extensive resections is the development of stricture - the risk is 70-80% if more than 75% of the circumference is removed and almost 100% if the whole circumference is removed. Thus, an effective method to prevent post-ER/ESD esophageal stricture would be of major benefit, because treatment of strictures requires multiple sessions of endoscopic dilatation and may carry a risk of perforation. Moreover, not all strictures are easy to treat and some patients may develop refractory strictures. There are several techniques and methods, which have been tested in both experimental and/or clinical studies but no one has received general acceptance based on results of high-quality evidence. The studies are usually small with a limited number of patients, there is a lack of randomized controlled trials and some techniques have been described only in experimental studies. Thus, prevention of post-ESD strictures remains an unresolved issue. On the other hand, because of the high risk of stricture and partially proven effectiveness of some preventive techniques, a preventive strategy should be considered in patients undergoing extensive ER/ESD in the esophagus. There is, however, no evidence about the superiority or inferiority of a particular preventive strategy compared to other techniques, moreover, there is paucity of data assessing the effectiveness of the combination of different preventive methods. The best preventive strategies known so far include 1) oral or local administration of corticosteroids; and 2) preventive stenting. Other strategies (preventive sessions of endoscopic dilatation or tissue engineering methods) have unproven efficacy or are too demanding for practical use. Nevertheless, the use of (any) preventive strategy after extensive ER/ESD of the esophagus probably reduces the risk of stricture and the number of endoscopic dilatations, therefore, it should be considered in these patients. However, there is a need for high quality evidence as well as for new ideas and approaches to resolve this important clinical problem.
内镜黏膜下剥离术或广泛内镜切除术可彻底切除食管周围或近周围的肿瘤性病变。与传统食管切除术相比,这些内镜方法的优点是微创性和严重不良事件风险低。这些广泛切除术的主要缺点是狭窄的形成——如果切除超过75%的周径,风险为70-80%,如果切除整个周径,风险几乎为100%。因此,一种有效的预防内镜切除/内镜黏膜下剥离术后食管狭窄的方法将具有重大益处,因为狭窄的治疗需要多次内镜扩张,且可能有穿孔风险。此外,并非所有狭窄都易于治疗,一些患者可能会出现难治性狭窄。有几种技术和方法已在实验和/或临床研究中进行了测试,但基于高质量证据的结果,没有一种得到普遍认可。这些研究通常规模较小,患者数量有限,缺乏随机对照试验,一些技术仅在实验研究中有所描述。因此,预防内镜黏膜下剥离术后狭窄仍然是一个未解决的问题。另一方面,由于狭窄风险高且一些预防技术的有效性部分得到证实,对于接受食管广泛内镜切除/内镜黏膜下剥离术的患者应考虑采取预防策略。然而,与其他技术相比,没有证据表明特定预防策略的优劣,此外,评估不同预防方法联合有效性的数据也很少。目前已知的最佳预防策略包括:1)口服或局部应用皮质类固醇;2)预防性置入支架。其他策略(内镜扩张预防性治疗或组织工程方法)的疗效未经证实或在实际应用中要求过高。尽管如此,在食管广泛内镜切除/内镜黏膜下剥离术后使用(任何)预防策略可能会降低狭窄风险和内镜扩张次数,因此,应在这些患者中考虑使用。然而,需要高质量证据以及新的思路和方法来解决这一重要的临床问题。