内镜下注射肉毒毒素治疗贲门失弛缓症的研究

将48例贲门失弛缓症患者随机分为两组，A组注射肉毒毒素治疗，B组用小气囊扩张治疗。分别于治疗后1周、3个月和1年比较两组患者的临床症状积分、下食管插约肌的压力（LESP）、松弛率（LESRR）。结果：治疗后1周、3个月和1年的有效率及治疗前后LESP、LESRR的差值，注射肉毒毒素组均高于小气囊扩张组；两组均无并发症发生。认为内镜下食管下括约肌内注射肉毒毒素治疗贲门失弛缓症的近期疗效高，且患者痛苦小。     

肉毒毒素注射联合球囊扩张治疗贲门失弛缓症的临床价值

目的探讨肉毒毒素注射联合球囊扩张术在治疗贲门失弛缓症中的临床价值。方法选取贲门失弛缓症患者35例，分为两组，其中18例行球囊扩张术（扩张组），17例行肉毒毒素注射联合球囊扩张术（联合组）。随访12个月观察临床症状评分，测量食管钡餐摄片的钡柱高及宽。结果两组患者经治疗后临床症状明显改善，在术后1周、3个月两组的临床症状的缓解差异无统计学意义（P〉0．1），术后6、12个月联合治疗的临床症状缓解优于单独球囊扩张组（P〈0．05）。两组治疗后食管钡餐摄片观察均较治疗前明显好转（P〈0．05），术后1周联合组和单纯扩张组间食管排空差异无统计学意义，12个月联合组和单纯扩张组间食管排空差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论肉毒毒素注射联合球囊扩张可以有效的缓解患者症状，远期疗效优于单独球囊扩张。     

内镜超声引导下肉毒杆菌毒素注射治疗贲门失弛缓症临床疗效观察

目的探讨超声胃镜引导下肉毒杆菌毒素注射治疗贲门失弛缓症的临床疗效。方法45例贲门失弛缓症患者，分为球囊扩张、肉毒杆菌毒素注射及Heller手术3组，观察治疗前、治疗后6个月和12个月患者临床症状计分和钡餐检查中食管宽度。结果3组患者治疗后吞咽困难、胸痛和反流症状的计分以及食管钡餐检查食管最大宽度均明显低于治疗前（P〈0．05），且3组间临床症状改善程度差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05），但扩张组和Heller手术组各有1例发生食管穿孔并发症，肉毒杆菌毒素组无并发症发生，患者耐受良好。结论超声胃镜引导下肉毒杆菌毒素注射是治疗贲门失弛缓症安全、有效的方法。     

内镜下注射肉毒毒素治疗贲门失弛缓症的临床研究

目的探讨内镜下注射肉毒毒素治疗贲门失弛缓症的治疗效果。方法对30例贲门失弛缓症患者进行内镜下注射肉毒毒素治疗,观察其疗效。结果治疗后患者症状及LESP、LESRR均有改善。结论肉毒毒素治疗贲门失弛缓症,方法简单,疗效较好,值得临床推广应用。     

贲门失弛缓症的治疗进展

贲门失弛缓症是一种病因不明的食管功能性疾病，目前对其治疗主要是缓解临床症状，本比较四种治疗贲门失弛缓症的方法即药物治疗、肉毒毒素治疗、球囊扩张以及肌切开术的疗效，用于选择治疗贲门失弛缓症的最佳方案。     

贲门失弛缓症的治疗进展

贲门失弛缓症是一种病因不明的食管功能性疾病,目前对其治疗主要是缓解临床症状,本文比较四种治疗贲门失弛缓症的方法即药物治疗、肉毒毒素治疗、球囊扩张以及肌切开术的疗效,用于选择治疗贲门失弛缓症的最佳方案。     

气囊扩张术治疗食管贲门失弛缓症105例临床分析

目的：观察气囊扩张术治疗食管贲门失弛缓症的疗效。方法：华西医大附一院收治的食管贲门失弛缓症病人105例，其中男性56例(53%)，女性49例(47%)，平均年龄34．2岁。主要临床症状为吞咽困难，食物反流，胸痛及体重减轻等。通过临床表现，X线钡餐可明确诊断。气囊经胃镜下导丝置人，压力5～10 PSI，维持30～60s，间隔2～3min后再扩张共2～3次。结果：105例病人显效95例（90．3％)，有效10例(9．6％)，无效0例。术后无1例穿孔，其他并发症轻。复发后重复扩张仍有效，较肉毒杆菌毒素注射及Hellsr’s肌切开术有更多优越性。结论：气囊扩张术为治疗贲门失弛缓症的首选方法。     

贲门失迟缓症的内镜下治疗进展

贲门失弛缓症是一种食管动力障碍性疾病,至今病因及发病机制仍不十分明确,其治疗主要在于缓解症状,内镜下的治疗方法主要有:内镜下注射肉毒杆菌毒素、气囊扩张术、支架置入术和经口内镜下肌切开术等。     

贲门失弛缓症治疗方式的探讨

目的比较胸腔镜辅助Heller手术、开胸Heller手术、消化内镜下球囊扩张及消化内镜下肉毒毒素注射治疗贲门失弛缓症疗效，探讨贲门失弛缓症合理有效的治疗方法。方法81例贲门失弛缓症患者按不同治疗方式分为4组：胸腔镜辅助Heller手术18例；开胸Heller手术21例；消化内镜下球囊扩张22例；肉毒毒素注射治疗20例。比较各组治疗前后症状评分、食管末端直径、食管下段括约肌压力、食管末端pH和各组有效率。结果4组患者治疗前后相比，症状评分、食管末端直径、食管下段括约肌压力、食管末端pH差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．05），治疗有效率胸腔镜组为94．4％、开胸组为95．2％、球囊扩张组为63．6％、肉毒素注射组为55．0％，Heller手术较消化内镜下治疗更为有效（P〈0．05）。结论Heller手术治疗效果较球囊扩张及肉毒素注射为佳，胸腔镜辅助Heller手术较开胸Heller手术具有创伤小、恢复快、住院时间短等优势。     

气囊扩张和肉毒毒素注射治疗贲门失弛缓食管动力变化的比较

目的 了解经内镜气囊扩张和肉毒毒素注射2种方法治疗贯门失弛缓症后食管动力的改变。方法 118例经内镜、钡餐及食管测压确诊为贲门失弛缓症患者随机分为2组:扩张组56例,注射组62例,分别采用内镜下气囊扩张和肉毒毒素注射方法。治疗前、治疗后1周内测定下食管括约肌压力(LESP)、下食管括约肌松弛压(LESRP)以及下食管括约肌松弛率(LESR)等指标,并观察患者症状缓解情况。结果 2组治疗前食管动力学3个指标无统计学差异,扩张组治疗后LESP降至(6.03±3.45)mm Hg,LESRP为(-0.11±2.34)mm Hg,LESRR升至92.50％±13.86％,与治疗前相比,差异均有显著性意义。注射组治疗后LESP降至(23.16±16.17)mm Hg,与治疗前相比,差异有显著性意义,LESRP、LESRR与治疗前相比,差异无显著性意义。临床疗效,扩张组:显效45例,改善11例;注射组:显效15例,改善38例,无效9例。结论 气囊扩张法治疗贲门失弛缓近期疗效较肉毒毒素注射法要好,临床症状的改善同LESP及LESRP的降低,特别是LESRP的降低有非常密切的对应关系。     

Current trends in the management of achalasia

Despite the recent advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology of achalasia, aetiology remains obscure and this primary oesophageal motor disorder is still considered "idiopathic" in nature. As a consequence, the therapeutic approach remains palliative. Since there is little or no chance of improving the motor abnormalities of the oesophageal body, treatment of achalasia is aimed at symptomatic relief of functional lower oesophageal sphincter obstruction. Pharmacologic treatment induces only a limited and brief improvement. It may be used to treat early cases of achalasia without significant oesophageal dilatation and to manage patients exhibiting some but not all the characteristics of achalasia (e.g. transitional forms). In any event, drug therapy should be seen as a short-term measure and be considered as an alternative only in patients unfit to undergo pneumatic dilatation or surgery. Pneumatic dilatation and surgical myotomy (now increasingly carried out through a minimally invasive approach) remain, therefore, the two main approaches which guarantee long-lasting symptomatic relief. Unfortunately, both pneumatic dilatation and Heller cardiomyotomy are only palliative as neither reliably reverses oesophageal aperistalsis not corrects the incomplete postdeglutition relaxation of the lower oesophageal sphincter. They do, however, improve symptoms by lowering lower oesophageal sphincter pressure thus enhancing oesophageal emptying by gravity. Recently a third approach, consisting in perendoscopic injection of botulinum toxin into the lower oesophageal sphincter is gaining acceptance. Indeed, more endoscopists are finding this kind of treatment attractive because it does not carry the risk of perforation that can occur with pneumatic dilatation. However, since symptomatic improvement with botulinum toxin only lasts a few months, either repeated injections are required or the patient must be switched to other therapy. There may be, however, subsets of patients for whom BoTox injection is the preferred approach. They probably include elderly patients or patients with multiple medical problems who are poor candidates for more invasive procedures as well as those unwilling to have either surgery or pneumatic dilatation. Future approaches to achalasia may markedly change from the suggested algorithm depending on the long-term efficacy and safety as well as cost analysis of BoTox injection and of minimally invasive surgery.     

贲门失弛缓症内镜下注射肉毒毒素与气囊扩张术疗效比较的系统评价

目的 系统评价内镜下注射肉毒毒素与气囊扩张治疗贲门失弛缓症的有效性和安全性.方法 应用国际Cochrane协作网系统评价方法进行评价.结果 共纳人12个试验包括559例患者.Meta分析显示:(1)短期总有效率内镜下气囊扩张治疗优于内镜下注射肉毒毒素治疗(83.21%比71.27%,P<0.01).(2)长期总有效率内镜下气囊扩张治疗优于内镜下注射肉毒毒素治疗(54.59%比27.60%,P<0.01).(3)临床复发率内镜下注射肉毒毒素治疗高于内镜下气囊扩张治疗(55.66%比18.84%,P<0.01).(4)副作用及并发症发生率内镜下气囊扩张治疗高于内镜下注射肉毒毒素治疗(13.01%比1.35%,P<0.01).结论 目前的证据表明:内镜下注射肉毒毒素与气囊扩张均有较好的短期疗效和安全性,内镜下气囊扩张治疗在长期疗效上更优于内镜下注射肉毒毒素.     

Outcome of sequential dilatation in achalasia cardia patients: a prospective cohort study

Esophagus - Sequential increment of balloon diameter for endoscopic pneumatic dilatation is a protocol that is used for symptomatic relief in achalasia cardia. However, most of the studies...     

Intrasphincteric botulinum toxin versus pneumatic dilatation for achalasia: a cost minimization analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pneumatic dilatation or intrasphincteric botulinum toxin injection provide effective symptom relief for patients with achalasia. Although intrasphincteric botulinum toxin injection is simple and safe, its efficacy may be short-lived. Pneumatic dilatation lasts longer, but esophageal perforation is a risk. We compared treatment costs for pneumatic dilatation and intrasphincteric botulinum toxin injection using a decision analysis model to determine whether the practical advantages of intrasphincteric botulinum toxin injection outweigh the economic impact of the need for frequent re-treatment. METHODS: Probability estimates for intrasphincteric botulinum toxin injection were derived from published reports. Probability estimates for the pneumatic dilatation strategy were obtained by retrospective review of our 10-year experience using the Rigiflex dilator. Direct, "third-party payer" costs were determined in Canadian dollars. RESULTS: Intrasphincteric botulinum toxin injection was significantly more costly at $5033 compared with $3608 for the pneumatic dilatation strategy, yielding an incremental cost of $1425 over the 10-year period considered. Sensitivity analysis showed that pneumatic dilatation is less expensive across all probable ranges of costs and probability estimates. The intrasphincteric botulinum toxin injection strategy is less costly if life-expectancy is less than 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Intrasphincteric botulinum toxin injection is more costly than pneumatic dilatation for the treatment of achalasia. The added expense of frequent re-treatment with intrasphincteric botulinum toxin injection outweighs the potential economic benefits of the safety of the procedure, unless life-expectancy is 2 years or less.     

Recent trends in endoscopic management of achalasia

Esophageal achalasia is a chronic and progressive motility disorder characterized by absence of esophageal body peristalsis associated with an impaired relaxation of lower esophageal sphincter(LES) and usually with an elevated LES pressure, leading to an altered passage of bolus through the esophago-gastric junction. A definitive cure for achalasia is currently unavailable. Palliative treatment options provide only food and liquid bolus intake and relief of symptoms. Endoscopic therapy for achalasia aims to disrupt or weaken the lower esophageal sphincter. Intra-sphincteric injection of botulinum toxin is reserved for elderly or severely ill patients. Pneumatic dilation provides superior results than botulinum toxin injection and a similar mediumterm efficacy almost comparable to that attained after surgery. Per oral endoscopic myotomy is a promising option for treating achalasia, but it requires increased experience and further objective and long-term follow up. This article will review different endoscopic treatments in achalasia, and summarize the short-term and long-term outcomes.     

The cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for achalasia

Achalasia is a disorder characterized by abnormal motility of the esophageal body and the lower esophageal sphincter, resulting in dysphagia, regurgitation, and chest pain. Treatment options for achalasia include Botulinum toxin injection, pneumatic balloon dilation, and surgical esophagomyotomy. The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of these three strategies in the treatment of achalasia in adults. We constructed a Markov cost-effectiveness model comparing Botox injection, pneumatic balloon dilation, and laparoscopic esophagomyotomy as initial treatments of achalasia. Costs and probabilities were derived from the published literature. The utility for symptomatic achalasia was derived from a sample of patients with achalasia. Sensitivity analyses were performed. Over a five-year time horizon, pneumatic dilation was the most cost-effective treatment strategy for achalasia, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1348 per quality-adjusted life-year compared to Botox. Although laparoscopic esophagomyotomy was more effective than the other treatment options, it was not cost-effective because of its high initial cost. In conclusion, pneumatic dilation is the most cost-effective treatment option for adults with achalasia. Further studies should examine the long-term relapse rates following treatment with Botox and more precisely determine the quality of life of symptomatic achalasia.     

Choice of therapy for achalasia in relation to age

Over an 11-year period 132 patients with achalasia underwent a total of 253 pneumatic bag dilatations of the cardia as the initial treatment. Adequate symptomatic relief was obtained in the majority, but 16 needed cardiomyotomy after pneumatic dilatation had failed to give lasting symptomatic relief. Older patients, aged 60 years or more, showed longer-lasting improvement with pneumatic dilatation than did younger ones and only 1 patient over 50 required cardiomyotomy. Benefit from pneumatic dilatation showed a closer relationship to age than to oesophageal diameter. Of 50 patients followed for more than 5 years, 48% required no further treatment, 40% needed at least one further dilatation to achieve symptomatic relief and 12% came to cardiomyotomy. This study suggests that pneumatic dilatation is safe, effective and particularly useful in the management of the elderly achalasic patient.     

Long-term efficacy of Botulinum toxin in classical achalasia: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the long-term efficacy of intrasphincteric Botulinum toxin A injection in a prospective cohort study of 30 patients with achalasia. METHODS: Thirty patients with classical achalasia were treated with intrasphincteric Botulinum toxin A injection. Follow-up consisted of clinical assessment, symptom scoring, and postinjection manometry. RESULTS: Symptomatic improvement for >3 months was seen in 23 of 30 patients (77%). Of the 23 initial responders, seven (30%) experienced a sustained symptomatic response after a single Botulinum toxin injection (mean follow-up, 21 months). The remaining 16 initial responders (70%) eventually relapsed (mean initial response, 11 months). Nine received a 2nd Botulinum toxin injection, and seven experienced an ongoing response (mean duration, 9 months); two patients eventually required a 3rd injection with good effect (mean duration, 22 months). The remaining seven patients who relapsed after Botulinum toxin opted for pneumatic dilation or surgical myotomy. Five of the seven patients who had no initial response received a 2nd injection but again did not respond. A residual lower esophageal sphincter pressure <18 mm Hg after the first Botulinum toxin injection predicted a good response to Botulinum therapy (single or multiple injections, p < 0.002, positive predictive value = 0.71, negative predictive value = 1.0). Neither initial nor sustained response to Botulinum toxin could be predicted based on gender, age, duration of illness, previous pneumatic dilation, or esophageal motility before treatment. CONCLUSIONS: We found that 77% of patients with classical achalasia experienced a good symptomatic response after Botulinum toxin and 30% of initial responders achieve sustained symptomatic relief after a single treatment with Botulinum toxin. The initial responders who relapsed did well with subsequent Botulinum toxin A. Lack of an initial symptomatic response and residual lower esophageal sphincter pressure > or =18 mm Hg after Botulinum toxin are associated with a poor response.     

Achalasia cardia with esophageal varix managed with endoscopic ultrasound-guided botulinum toxin injection

Achalasia cardia is a motility disorder of the esophagus characterized by failure of relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter. Nitrates and calcium channel blockers, pneumatic dilatation, botulinum toxin injection and surgical myotomy have been described in literature as possible management options. We present a patient who presented with achalasia and was co-incidentally diagnosed to have cryptogenic cirrhosis with portal hypertension and had esophageal varices. This clinical combination precluded the use of pneumatic dilatation and surgical myotomy. We injected botulinum toxin into the lower esophageal sphincter using a celiac plexus neurolysis needle under endoscopic ultrasound guidance; the clinical response was good.     

Intrasphincteric botulinum toxin versus pneumatic balloon dilation for treatment of primary achalasia

GOALS: Despite a high success rate, pneumatic dilatation for achalasia is accompanied by a significant risk of esophageal perforation. Injection of botulinum toxin (botox) into the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) can lead to improvement in symptoms with reduced risk of complications. Direct comparisons of the two techniques are needed to define their role in clinical management. STUDY: We compared pneumatic dilatation to botox for patients with achalasia using a double blind, randomized study design. Patients underwent clinical, manometric, radiographic and endoscopic evaluation to confirm primary achalasia. They were randomized to receive either 80 units of botox into the LES or Witzel balloon dilatation. Patients also received sham dilatation or injection, respectively. The patients and investigators assessing symptom response were blinded to therapy. Symptoms and esophageal function were assessed at 3 weeks, 3 months and 1 year after therapy. Treatment failure was defined as the lack of decrease in symptom grade more than 1 or recurrence of symptoms. Patients with treatment failure crossed over to the alternative treatment. RESULTS: Thirty four patients were studied, and 31 completed the trial. Of the 18 patients randomized to Witzel dilatation, 16 (89%) of 18 remained in clinical remission. Of the two patients with treatment failure, one responded to botox injection. Of the 16 patients randomized to botox, (38%) 6 of 16 remained in clinical remission. Four patients had initial failure, and 6 relapsed at a mean of 4 months after therapy. Of the nine patients who crossed over to dilatation, seven responded well, but two required surgical management of perforation. Although both treatments had excellent initial clinical improvement, patients randomized to Witzel dilatation had superior long-term success ( < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Initial therapy with Witzel dilatation is associated with better long-term outcome than a single injection of botox. Because of the risk of endoscopic perforation, botox remains a viable alternative to dilatation.