The effect of pneumatic dilation in management of postfundoplication dysphagia

BACKGROUND

Fundoplication surgery is a commonly performed procedure for gastro-esophageal reflux disease or hiatal hernia repair. Up to 10% of patients develop persistent postoperative dysphagia after surgery. Data on the effectiveness of pneumatic dilation for treatment are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and identify clinical factors associated with successful response to pneumatic dilation among patients with persistent postfundoplication dysphagia (PPFD).

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated patients who had undergone pneumatic dilation for PPFD between 1999 and 2016. Patients with dysphagia or achalasia prior to fundoplication were excluded. Demographic information, surgical history, severity of dysphagia, and clinical outcomes were collected. Data pertaining to esophagram, manometry, endoscopy, and pneumatic dilation were also collected.

RESULTS

We identified 38 patients (82% female, 95% Caucasian, and median age 59 years) with PPFD who completed pneumatic dilation. The median postfundoplication dysphagia score was 2. Eleven patients had abnormal peristalsis on manometry. Seventeen patients reported response (seven complete) with an average decrease of 1 in their dysphagia score. Fifteen patients underwent reoperation due to PPFD. Hiatal hernia repair was the only factor that predicts a higher response rate to pneumatic dilation. Only one patient in our study developed complication (pneumoperitoneum) from pneumatic dilation.

CONCLUSION & INFERENCES

We found that pneumatic dilation to be a safe treatment option for PPFD with moderate efficacy. Patients who developed PPFD after a hiatal hernia repair may gain the greatest benefit after pneumatic dilation. We were not able to identify additional clinical, radiological, endoscopic, or manometric parameters that were predictive of response.

Oesophageal lichen planus: the efficacy of topical steroid-based therapies

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal lichen planus is an idiopathic inflammatory disorder characterized by significant oesophageal stricturing. Oesophageal lichen planus is a rare, difficult to diagnose, and likely an under recognized disease. As a result, there is no standardized approach to therapy and treatment strategies vary.

AIM

To examine the utility of topical steroid therapy (fluticasone or budesonide) in the management of oesophageal lichen planus.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted of patients diagnosed with oesophageal lichen planus who underwent baseline and follow up endoscopy pre and post topical steroid therapy between 1995 and 2016 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester MN. Average time between upper GI endoscopy was 3.2 months (0.7-11.7). Swallowed steroid preparations included fluticasone 880 μg twice daily or budesonide 3 mg twice daily. Patients were reviewed for symptomatic response to therapy using the Dakkak-Bennett dysphagia score (0-4, no dysphagia to total aphagia). Pre- and post-endoscopic findings were assessed. Additional baseline demographic, endoscopic, and histologic data were also obtained.

RESULTS

We identified 40 patients who met the inclusion criteria. A significant reduction in median dysphagia score from 1 (0-4) to 0 (0-3) after steroid therapy (P < 0.001) was noted. 62% of patients reported resolution of their dysphagia after receiving topical corticosteroids. 72.5% had an endoscopic response to steroid therapy.

CONCLUSION

Topical swallowed budesonide or fluticasone appear to effective treatment for oesophageal lichen planus.

Oesophageal narrowing on barium oesophagram is more common in adult patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis than PPI-responsive oesophageal eosinophilia

BACKGROUND

To date there have been no clear features that aid in differentiating patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) from PPI-responsive oesophageal eosinophilia (PPI-REE). However, barium swallow roentgenography is a more sensitive and specific measure to detect subtle fibrostenotic remodeling changes present in EoE. We aim to characterise any clinical, endoscopic, histiological or barium roentgenographic differences between EoE and PPI-REE.

AIM

To characterise any clinical, endoscopic, histiological or barium roentgenographic differences between EoE and PPI-REE.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis on data collected from a tertiary referral centre population from 2010 to 2015. Data from 66 patients with EoE and 28 patients with PPI-REE were analysed. Cases were adults who met consensus guidelines for EOE, and had a barium swallow study within 6 months of the index endoscopy. Clinical, endoscopic, histiological and barium swallow findings were collected.

RESULTS

Patients with EoE reported similar characteristics as PPI-REE patients, except EoE patients were younger (35.6 vs. 46.6 years; P = 0.011), had earlier symptom onset (29.0 vs. 38.0 years; P = 0.026), and smaller oesophageal diameters on barium swallow (19.5 mm vs. 20; P = 0.042). Patients with EoE were more likely to have distal strictures (EoE 77% vs. 25%; P = 0.02) and, importantly, a greater likelihood of small calibre oesophagus (51.5% vs. 17.9%; P = 0.002). Moreover, EoE patients had a higher probability of developing small calibre oesophagus after 20 years of symptoms (72.3% vs. 30.2%; P = 0.074) compared to PPI-REE patients.

CONCLUSIONS

When compared with eosinophilic oesophagitis, PPI-REE patients demonstrate findings that suggest PPI-responsive oesophageal eosinophilia to be a later onset, less aggressive form of oesophageal stricturing disease than eosinophilic oesophagitis.