增大食管癌大小是否能改善食管扩张反应?

Q1 Medicine
Amal Shine, Mohamed Eisa, Endashaw Omer, Matthew Heckroth, Michael Eiswerth, Benjamin Rogers, Paul Tennant, Vincent Nguyen, Aye Aye Maung, Maiying Kong, Stephen A McClave
{"title":"增大食管癌大小是否能改善食管扩张反应?","authors":"Amal Shine, Mohamed Eisa, Endashaw Omer, Matthew Heckroth, Michael Eiswerth, Benjamin Rogers, Paul Tennant, Vincent Nguyen, Aye Aye Maung, Maiying Kong, Stephen A McClave","doi":"10.1007/s11894-025-00982-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Because dysphagia occurs when the esophageal luminal diameter is < 13 mm, the traditional goal of dilation is set at 14-16 mm (42-48 Fr) to relieve symptoms. This study was designed to determine whether increasing the size of dilators further would improve durability of response to bougienage.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Patients with severe or non-severe esophageal stricture and dysphagia were randomized to two different sizes of dilators. Diet and Dysphagia scores were calculated before and after index dilation, then every 4-8 weeks by phone for 12 months. Of 35 patients (mean age 63.1 yrs, 37.1% male) in the study, 11 had severe post-radiation strictures randomized to 42 Fr (n = 5) vs. 51 Fr (n = 6) Savary, 24 had non-severe strictures randomized to 46 Fr (n = 11) vs. 60 Fr (n = 13) Maloney. For severe strictures, number of dilations was nonsignificantly less with the larger 51 Fr versus 42 Fr (4.0 ± 1.73 vs. 5.2 ± 2.17, p = 1.00), and duration between dilations was longer (167 ± 154 vs. 64 ± 25 days, p = 0.41). For non-severe strictures, the smaller size 46 Fr dilator versus 60 Fr was associated with nonsignificantly fewer dilations (1.74 ± 0.81 vs. 1.77 ± 0.83, p = 0.70) and longer duration between sessions (265 ± 123 vs. 239 ± 103 days, p = 0.63). Bougienage with dilators larger than 14-16 mm (42-48 Fr) does not improve durability of symptomatic relief, either by decreasing the total number of dilations required or by increasing the symptom-free duration of response between sessions.</p>","PeriodicalId":10776,"journal":{"name":"Current Gastroenterology Reports","volume":"27 1","pages":"39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does Increasing Size of Bougienage Improve Response to Esophageal Dilation?\",\"authors\":\"Amal Shine, Mohamed Eisa, Endashaw Omer, Matthew Heckroth, Michael Eiswerth, Benjamin Rogers, Paul Tennant, Vincent Nguyen, Aye Aye Maung, Maiying Kong, Stephen A McClave\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11894-025-00982-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Because dysphagia occurs when the esophageal luminal diameter is < 13 mm, the traditional goal of dilation is set at 14-16 mm (42-48 Fr) to relieve symptoms. This study was designed to determine whether increasing the size of dilators further would improve durability of response to bougienage.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Patients with severe or non-severe esophageal stricture and dysphagia were randomized to two different sizes of dilators. Diet and Dysphagia scores were calculated before and after index dilation, then every 4-8 weeks by phone for 12 months. Of 35 patients (mean age 63.1 yrs, 37.1% male) in the study, 11 had severe post-radiation strictures randomized to 42 Fr (n = 5) vs. 51 Fr (n = 6) Savary, 24 had non-severe strictures randomized to 46 Fr (n = 11) vs. 60 Fr (n = 13) Maloney. For severe strictures, number of dilations was nonsignificantly less with the larger 51 Fr versus 42 Fr (4.0 ± 1.73 vs. 5.2 ± 2.17, p = 1.00), and duration between dilations was longer (167 ± 154 vs. 64 ± 25 days, p = 0.41). For non-severe strictures, the smaller size 46 Fr dilator versus 60 Fr was associated with nonsignificantly fewer dilations (1.74 ± 0.81 vs. 1.77 ± 0.83, p = 0.70) and longer duration between sessions (265 ± 123 vs. 239 ± 103 days, p = 0.63). Bougienage with dilators larger than 14-16 mm (42-48 Fr) does not improve durability of symptomatic relief, either by decreasing the total number of dilations required or by increasing the symptom-free duration of response between sessions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10776,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Gastroenterology Reports\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"39\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Gastroenterology Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-025-00982-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Gastroenterology Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-025-00982-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

回顾的目的:因为吞咽困难发生在食管管腔直径是最近的发现:严重或非严重食管狭窄和吞咽困难的患者被随机分配到两种不同尺寸的扩张器。在指数扩张前后计算饮食和吞咽困难评分,然后每4-8周通过电话计算一次,持续12个月。在研究中的35例患者(平均年龄63.1岁,37.1%男性)中,11例放疗后严重狭窄随机分为42 Fr (n = 5)和51 Fr (n = 6), 24例非严重狭窄随机分为46 Fr (n = 11)和60 Fr (n = 13)。对于严重的狭窄,51 Fr比42 Fr大,扩张次数无显著性减少(4.0±1.73比5.2±2.17,p = 1.00),扩张间隔时间更长(167±154比64±25天,p = 0.41)。对于非严重的狭窄,较小尺寸的46 Fr扩张器与60 Fr扩张器相比,扩张器的扩张率不显著降低(1.74±0.81 vs 1.77±0.83,p = 0.70),两次疗程之间的持续时间更长(265±123 vs 239±103天,p = 0.63)。布基纳使用大于14- 16mm (42- 48fr)的扩张器不能改善症状缓解的持久性,无论是通过减少所需扩张的总次数还是通过增加两次治疗之间无症状反应的持续时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does Increasing Size of Bougienage Improve Response to Esophageal Dilation?

Purpose of review: Because dysphagia occurs when the esophageal luminal diameter is < 13 mm, the traditional goal of dilation is set at 14-16 mm (42-48 Fr) to relieve symptoms. This study was designed to determine whether increasing the size of dilators further would improve durability of response to bougienage.

Recent findings: Patients with severe or non-severe esophageal stricture and dysphagia were randomized to two different sizes of dilators. Diet and Dysphagia scores were calculated before and after index dilation, then every 4-8 weeks by phone for 12 months. Of 35 patients (mean age 63.1 yrs, 37.1% male) in the study, 11 had severe post-radiation strictures randomized to 42 Fr (n = 5) vs. 51 Fr (n = 6) Savary, 24 had non-severe strictures randomized to 46 Fr (n = 11) vs. 60 Fr (n = 13) Maloney. For severe strictures, number of dilations was nonsignificantly less with the larger 51 Fr versus 42 Fr (4.0 ± 1.73 vs. 5.2 ± 2.17, p = 1.00), and duration between dilations was longer (167 ± 154 vs. 64 ± 25 days, p = 0.41). For non-severe strictures, the smaller size 46 Fr dilator versus 60 Fr was associated with nonsignificantly fewer dilations (1.74 ± 0.81 vs. 1.77 ± 0.83, p = 0.70) and longer duration between sessions (265 ± 123 vs. 239 ± 103 days, p = 0.63). Bougienage with dilators larger than 14-16 mm (42-48 Fr) does not improve durability of symptomatic relief, either by decreasing the total number of dilations required or by increasing the symptom-free duration of response between sessions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Current Gastroenterology Reports
Current Gastroenterology Reports Medicine-Gastroenterology
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: As the field of gastroenterology and hepatology rapidly evolves, the wealth of published literature can be overwhelming. The aim of the journal is to help readers stay abreast of such advances by offering authoritative, systematic reviews by leading experts. We accomplish this aim by appointing Section Editors who invite international experts to contribute review articles that highlight recent developments and important papers published in the past year. Major topics in gastroenterology are covered, including pediatric gastroenterology, neuromuscular disorders, infections, nutrition, and inflammatory bowel disease. These reviews provide clear, insightful summaries of expert perspectives relevant to clinical practice. An Editorial Board of internationally diverse members suggests topics of special interest to their country/region and ensures that topics are current and include emerging research. We also provide commentaries from well-known figures in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信