Digestive Disease Institute, Virginia Mason Medical Center, 1100 Ninth Avenue, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA.
Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Republic of Korea.
Dig Dis Sci. 2022 Apr;67(4):1295-1302. doi: 10.1007/s10620-021-06935-1. Epub 2021 Mar 19.
Fluoroscopy is often used for endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) of Crohn's disease (CD)-related strictures. However, its benefit remains unclear.
To compare EBD with (EBDF) and without (EBDNF) fluoroscopic guidance in CD patients with strictures.
Single-center, nested, case-control retrospective study of EBD for CD-related strictures. Technical and clinical success and safety outcomes were compared between EBDF and EBDNF.
A total of 122 strictures in 114 CD patients who underwent EBD from 2010 to 2018 at a single institution were reviewed (44 patients EBDF vs. 70 EBDNF). Esophagogastroduodenoscopy was the approach in 8 strictures, colonoscopy in 86, and deep enteroscopy in 28. There were no significant differences in the rates of technical and clinical success, need for repeat dilation and surgery between the two groups, although the mean maximal endoscopic balloon diameter was larger in the EBDNF group (17.1 ± 1.9 vs. 14.1 ± 2.5; p < 0.001). There was one perforation in EBDF and no serious complications in EBDNF. In multivariate analysis, balloon size < 15 mm (odds ratio [OR] 6.388; 95% CI 1.96-20.79; p = 0.002) and multiple strictures (OR 3.897; 95% CI 1.09-14.01; p = 0.037) were associated with repeat EBD, and age < 50 years (OR 7.178; 95% CI 1.38-37.44; p = 0.019) and small bowel (vs. colon) location (OR 7.525; 95% CI 1.51-37.47; p = 0.014) were associated with the need for surgery after EBD.
EBD for CD-related strictures can be performed safely and effectively without fluoroscopic guidance. Balloon size, patient age, stricture location, and multiplicity are associated with clinical success and avoidance of surgery.
透视常用于内镜球囊扩张(EBD)治疗克罗恩病(CD)相关狭窄。但其实用性仍不清楚。
比较 EBD 联合(EBDF)和不联合(EBDNF)透视引导治疗 CD 狭窄的效果。
对 2010 年至 2018 年期间在单中心接受 EBD 治疗的 114 例 CD 狭窄患者的 122 处狭窄进行单中心、嵌套、病例对照回顾性研究。比较 EBDF 与 EBDNF 之间的技术和临床成功率以及安全性。
共纳入 114 例患者的 122 处狭窄(44 例 EBDF 与 70 例 EBDNF)。内镜入路包括食管胃十二指肠镜 8 处,结肠镜 86 处,和小肠镜 28 处。两组之间的技术和临床成功率、需要再次扩张和手术的比率均无显著差异,尽管 EBDNF 组的最大内镜球囊直径更大(17.1±1.9 毫米比 14.1±2.5 毫米;p<0.001)。EBDF 组有 1 例穿孔,EBDNF 组无严重并发症。多变量分析显示,球囊直径<15 毫米(比值比 [OR] 6.388;95%置信区间 [CI] 1.96-20.79;p=0.002)和多处狭窄(OR 3.897;95%CI 1.09-14.01;p=0.037)与再次 EBD 相关,而年龄<50 岁(OR 7.178;95%CI 1.38-37.44;p=0.019)和小肠(而非结肠)位置(OR 7.525;95%CI 1.51-37.47;p=0.014)与 EBD 后需要手术相关。
EBD 治疗 CD 相关狭窄可在不透视引导的情况下安全有效地进行。球囊直径、患者年龄、狭窄位置和多发性与临床成功率和避免手术相关。