Article

Endoscopic balloon dilation of ileal pouch strictures.

Department of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Center for Inflammatory Bowel Disease, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio 44195, USA.
The American Journal of Gastroenterology (Impact Factor: 7.55). 01/2005; 99(12):2340-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2004.40604.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the surgical treatment of choice in patients with ulcerative colitis. Strictures can occur at the inlet and outlet of the pouch. Endoscopic balloon dilation has been successfully used in patients with Crohn's strictures at the small intestine and colon. There are no published trials on endoscopic balloon therapy of ileal pouch strictures.
To evaluate outpatient endoscopic balloon dilation of strictures in ileal pouches.
Patients underwent nonfluoroscopy-guided, nonsedated, outpatient endoscopic dilations with an 8.6-mm upper endoscope and through-the-scope balloons (size: 11-18 mm). Pre- and posttreatment Pouchitis Disease Activity Index symptom scores (range: 0-6), endoscopic stricture scores based on resistance in passing the endoscope (range: 0-4), and Cleveland Global Quality of Life were compared.
Nineteen patients with pouch strictures who had concurrent Crohn's disease of the pouch (n = 11), cuffitis (n = 5), and pouchitis (n = 3), including 14 inlet and 14 outlet strictures, were enrolled. The mean number of strictures for each patient was 1.61 +/- 0.78. All strictures were successfully dilated with the through-the-scope balloon, with a mean of 1.74 +/- 1.19 (range: 1-5) sessions for each patient. Nine patients had a second endoscopy at 8 wk and five patients had a third pouch endoscopy at 16 wk after the initial endoscopic dilation. Endoscopic stricture scores immediately (0.30 +/- 0.47), 8 wk (0.40 +/- 0.51), and 16 wk (0.44 +/- 0.76) after the dilation were significantly improved compared to the predilation stricture scores (2.67 +/- 0.78). The symptom scores and quality-of-life (QOL) scores improved at week 8 and 16 following dilation, with a mean follow-up of 6.10 +/- 5.83 months (2-25 months). No complications were experienced with the procedure. One patient with CD who failed endoscopic and medical therapy underwent pouch resection.
In conjunction with medical therapy, outpatient endoscopic balloon dilation appears safe and effective in treating pouch inlet and outlet strictures, by relieving symptoms, restoring pouch patency, and improving QOL in the majority of patients.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
202 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of stricturoplasty and endoscopic balloon dilatation in the treatment for ileal pouch strictures. METHOD: Consecutive inflammatory bowel disease patients with pouch strictures seen at our Pouch Center from 2002 to 2012 were studied. The efficacy and safety of stricturoplasty (vs. endoscopic balloon dilation) were evaluated with both univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients met the inclusion criteria, including 16 (9.6 %) with surgical stricturoplasty and 151 (90.4 %) with endoscopic balloon dilation. Ninety-four patients (56.3 %) were male, with a mean age at the diagnosis of pouch stricture of 41.6 ± 13.2 years. Fifty-one patients (30.5 %) had multiple pouch strictures, while 100 (59.9 %) patients had strictures at the pouch inlet. The mean length of pouch strictures was 1.2 ± 0.6 cm. No difference was found between the stricturoplasty and endoscopic dilation groups in clinicopathological variables, except for the degree of strictures (p = 0.019). After a mean follow-up of 4.1 ± 2.6 years, pouch stricture recurred in 92 patients (55.1 %) and 21 (12.6 %) patients developed pouch failure. The time interval between the procedure and pouch stricture recurrence or pouch failure was longer in the stricturoplasty group than that in the endoscopic dilation group (p < 0.001). Patients in the two groups had similar overall pouch survival rates and stricture-free survival rates. In the multivariate analysis, stricturoplasty vs. endoscopic dilation was not significantly associated with either overall pouch survival or stricture-free survival. There was no difference in the procedure-associated complication rates between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Surgical stricturoplasty and endoscopic dilation treatment are complimentary techniques for pouch strictures. Repeated endoscopic dilatations are often required, while surgical stricturoplasty appeared to yield a longer time interval to stricture recurrence or pouch failure.
    Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 05/2013; · 2.36 Impact Factor
  • Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology: the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association 11/2010; 9(3):198-201. · 5.64 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Both medical and surgical therapies for ulcerative colitis have inherent advantages and disadvantages that must be balanced for patients with moderate to severe disease. Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis has become the surgical treatment of choice for the majority of patients with ulcerative colitis who require proctocolectomy. However, adverse sequelae of mechanical, inflammatory, functional, neoplastic, and metabolic conditions related to the pouch can occur postoperatively. Recognition and familiarization of the disease conditions related to the ileal pouch can be challenging for practicing gastroenterologists. Accurate diagnosis and classification of the disease conditions are imperative for proper management and prognosis.
    Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology: the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association 03/2008; 6(2):145-58; quiz 124. · 5.64 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
64 Downloads
Available from
Jun 3, 2014