内镜下短期放置食管支架与气囊扩张治疗贲门失弛缓症的疗效与安全性比较

目的 比较内镜下短期放置特制可回收防反流支架与气囊扩张治疗贲门失弛缓症的近远期疗效及安全性,探讨贲门失弛缓症有效、安全的治疗方法.方法 129例贲门失弛缓症患者按治疗方式分为两组：气囊扩张组63例;特制可回收食管支架组66例.观察比较两组患者治疗前、治疗后1个月、6个月和1年的有效率、吞咽困难症状评分、食管宽度变化、并发症、住院时间及费用.结果 （1）两组患者治疗后随访期间吞咽困难症状较前均明显改善（P〈0.05）,气囊扩张组治疗1个月、6个月、1年后症状缓解有效率分别为100.0%,96.7%,91.5%,食管支架组治疗后同期有效率为100.0%,98.0%,97.1%.（2）治疗后1个月、6个月两组吞咽困难评分改善程度差异均无统计学意义（P〉0.05）,治疗后1年食管支架组吞咽困难评分改善程度优于气囊扩张组（P〈0.05）.（3）治疗后两组患者食管最狭窄处均较前明显增宽、食管最宽处均较前明显缩小（P〈0.05）,且食管宽度变化相似,差异均无统计学意义（P〉0.05）.（4）气囊扩张组1例发生食管穿孔,4例发生消化道出血.食管支架组无穿孔、出血等严重并发症发生,1例发生肉芽组织增生,2例发生支架移位,1例患者发生支架脱落.（5）两组患者住院时间比较无统计学差异（P〉0.05）,食管支架组住院费用高于气囊扩张组（P〈0.05）.结论 与内镜下气囊扩张比较,特制可回收食管支架治疗贲门失弛缓症的近期疗效与其相似,但远期疗效更优,且安全性高,是治疗贲门失弛缓的较理想选择.

A comparative study between temporary esophageal stenting and balloon dilatation for achalasia

Objective To compare the short- and long- term effects and safety of endoscopic balloon dilatation vs. placement of specially designed reclaimable self-expanding anti-reflux esophageal stents for achalasia. Methods A total of 129 patients with achalasia were divided into 2 groups to receive either endoscopic scopic balloon dilatation(,l=63)or endoscopic placement of specially designed reclaimable self-expandinganti-reflux esophageal stents (n = 66). The dysphagia symptom scores were recorded before and 1-month,6-month and 12-month after the procedure, respectively. The change in width of esophagus, procedure related complications, length and costs of hospitalization were also analyzed. Results Dysphagia symptom score was significantly decreased after the treatment in both groups (P < 0.05). The effective rates evaluated at 1-month, 6-month and 12-month after the procedure in balloon dilatation group were 100. 0% , 96. 7% and 91.5% , respectively, which in stenting group were 100.0% , 98. 0% and 97.1% , respectively. There was no significant difference in changes of symptom score at 1-month and 6-month after treatment between the 2 groups (P > 0.05) , while at 12-month after treatment, the decrease of symptom score in stenting group was significantly higher than that in balloon dilatation group (P<0. 05). After the treatment, the significant widening of the stricture and narrowing of the dilated esophagus were achieve in both groups (P < 0.05),while no significant difference between these 2 groups was observed in changes of width (P > 0. 05). Procedure related complications in balloon dilatation group included esophageal perforation (n =1) and upper gastrointestinal bleeding (n=4) , which was not occurred in stenting group, but complications included hyperplasia of granulation tissue (n = 1), stent dislocation (n =2) and defulvium (n = 1) was observed inthe latter group. The length of hospitalization was similar in 2 groups (P > 0. 05) , and the cost of hospitalization in stenting group was significantly higher than that of balloon dilatation group (P < 0. 05). Conclusion Compared with endoscopic balloon dilatation, the specially designed reclaimable self-expanding antireflux stents is a more ideal method for achalasia, with similar short-term effect, but better long-term effect and safety.