Pneumatic dilation not superior to sham dilation in dysphagia after antireflux surgery: BMJ

Written By :  Dr Satabdi Saha
Medically Reviewed By :  Dr. Kamal Kant Kohli
Published On 2021-01-28 04:44 GMT   |   Update On 2021-01-30 04:45 GMT
Advertisement

A recent study has highlighted that Pneumatic dilation with a 35 mm balloon is not superior to sham dilation for the treatment of persistent dysphagia after fundoplication.These findings have been put forth in the British Medical Journal .

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. To date, There is no evidence-based treatment for persistent dysphagia after laparoscopic fundoplication.

Advertisement

So, Researchers undertook a study with the aim to evaluate the effect of pneumatic dilation on persistent dysphagia after laparoscopic fundoplication.

For the study ,Researchers performed a multicentre, single-blind, randomised sham-controlled trial of patients with persistent dysphagia (>3 months) after laparoscopic fundoplication. Patients with an Eckardt symptom score ≥4 were randomly assigned to pneumatic dilation (PD) using a 35 mm balloon or sham dilation. Primary outcome was treatment success, defined as an Eckardt score <4 and a minimal reduction of 2 points in the Eckardt score after 30 days. Secondary outcomes included change in stasis on timed barium oesophagogram, change in high-resolution manometry parameters and questionnaires on quality of life, reflux and dysphagia symptoms.

Data analysis revealed the following facts.

  • Forty-two patients were randomised. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the success rates of PD (7/21 patients (33%)) and sham dilation (8/21 patients (38%)) were similar after 30 days (risk difference −4.7% (95% CI (−33.7% to 24.2%) p=0.747).
  • There was no significant difference in change of stasis on the timed barium oesophagogram after 2 min (PD vs sham: median 0.0 cm, p25–p75 range 0.0–4.3 cm vs median 0.0 cm, p25–p75 range 0.0–0.0; p=0.122) or change in lower oesophageal sphincter relaxation pressure (PD vs sham: 10.54±6.25 vs 14.60±6.17 mm Hg; p=0.052).
  • Quality of life, reflux and dysphagia symptoms were not significantly different between the two groups.

The researchers concluded that Pneumatic dilation with a 35 mm balloon is not superior to sham dilation for the treatment of persistent dysphagia after fundoplication.

For the full article follow the link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2020-322355

Primary source: British Medical Journal


Tags:    
Article Source : British Medical Journal

Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.

NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.

Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Similar News