Endoscopic balloon dilatation in pediatric patients with esophageal strictures: From the past to the future

Fang, Shiuh-Bin

doi:10.1016/j.pedneo.2019.03.002

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many reports have suggested that all endoscopic interventions should be performed under general anesthesia in pediatric patients (12). For children with esophageal stenosis, there have been many studies supporting EBD as a safe procedure with minimal morbidity and mortality, especially for anastomotic strictures, and those shorter than 5 cm (13,14), making it a common first-line therapy for esophageal stenosis. Moreover, its safety and effectiveness have been emphasized, along with its long-term clinical success and nutritional promotion (15,16).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endoscopic Treatment for Pediatric Esophageal Stenosis Induced by Chemical Burn, Congenitally, or After Surgical Repair of Esophageal Atresia

Zhou

Peng

et al. 2022

Front. Pediatr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic treatment for congenital pediatric esophageal stenosis or pediatric stenosis that develops after a chemical burn or surgical repair of esophageal atresia.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 15 pediatric patients who underwent endoscopic treatments (dilation and/or stenting and/or incision) for congenital esophageal stenosis or esophageal stenosis that developed after a chemical burn or surgical repair of esophageal atresia, between January 2010 and January 2019. The patients were periodically followed-up to assess the safety and efficacy of treatment by comparing the diameter of stricture and dysphagia score before and after procedures, and complications or recurrence.ResultsAll children successfully underwent the procedures. Fourteen of the 15 patients received endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) as the first step of treatment, but EBD alone only resolved the symptoms in two patients. The remaining patients received other comprehensive treatments, such as EBD with endoscopic incision (EI), EBD with stent replacement, or a combination of EBD, stent replacement, and EI. Eleven (11/15, 73.3%) patients experienced symptomatic relief after endoscopic treatment, and recurrence was noted in four patients on 3–36 months after the final endoscopic treatment. All four patients underwent esophageal surgery to relieve their symptoms. Until October 2021, all patients experienced symptom relief, and their dysphagia scores decreased from 3–4 to 0–1 during the follow-up period of 8–121 months. The average diameter of stenosis was increased from 0.34 cm (range 0.2–0.7 cm) to 1.03 cm (range 0.8–1.2 cm). No severe complications occurred during endoscopic treatment and follow-up.ConclusionsEndoscopic treatment is safe and effective for pediatric esophageal stenosis that is congenital or induced by chemical burns or surgical repair of esophageal atresia. Comparative large-scale studies are required to confirm our findings.

show abstract