Endoscopy 2016; 48(01): 71-74
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1392603
Innovations and brief communications
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Efficacy of viscous budesonide slurry for prevention of esophageal stricture formation after complete endoscopic mucosal resection of short-segment Barrett’s neoplasia

Farzan F. Bahin
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
,
Mahesh Jayanna
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
,
Stephen J. Williams
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
,
Eric Y. T. Lee
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
,
Michael J. Bourke
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
2   Westmead Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 30 December 2014

accepted after revision 01 June 2015

Publication Date:
04 September 2015 (online)

Background and aims: Complete endoscopic resection (CER) of short-segment Barrett’s esophagus with high grade dysplasia (HGD) and early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EEA) is a precise staging tool and achieves durable disease control. The major drawback is development of post-endoscopic resection esophageal stricture (PERES). No effective therapy to prevent PERES has been described. Viscous budesonide slurry (VBS) may have a role in the prevention of PERES by suppressing the post-CER inflammatory process. The study aim was to evaluate the efficacy of VBS for the prevention of PERES.

Methods: Prospective data were collected on patients referred for CER of HGD or EEA. After January 2012, patients routinely received VBS (two 0.5-mg/2-mL budesonide respules mixed with sucralose) twice daily for 6 weeks following each stage of the CER schedule. All patients received high dose proton pump inhibitor therapy for the duration of CER and the following 3 months. Patients had no other intervention to prevent PERES. A validated dysphagia score was used (0 – 4, no dysphagia to aphagia). Endoscopic dilation was performed for dysphagia. Patients receiving VBS were compared with historical controls. The primary endpoint was the need for dilation.

Results: Between January 2008 and January 2015, 104 of 116 eligible patients completed CER. The VBS group (n = 29) and non-VBS group (n = 75) had similar patient, disease, and procedural characteristics. Dilations were needed in 13.8 % vs. 37.3 % (P = 0.03), with a median of one vs. two procedures (P = 0.01), and median dysphagia score during CER of 0 vs. 1 (P = 0.02) in the VBS and non-VBS groups, respectively. No VBS-related adverse events were noted.

Conclusion: In this pilot study VBS significantly reduced PERES and shortened the dilation program after CER.

 
  • References

  • 1 Pohl H, Sirovich B, Welch HG. Esophageal adenocarcinoma incidence: are we reaching the peak?. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010; 19: 1468-1470
  • 2 Endo M, Yoshino K, Kawano T et al. Clinicopathologic analysis of lymph node metastasis in surgically resected superficial cancer of the thoracic esophagus. Dis Esophagus 2000; 13: 125-129
  • 3 Pech O, May A, Manner H et al. Long-term efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection for patients with mucosal adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. Gastroenterology 2014; 146: 652-660 e1
  • 4 Moss A, Bourke MJ, Hourigan LF et al. Endoscopic resection for Barrett’s high-grade dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma: an essential staging procedure with long-term therapeutic benefit. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 1276-1283
  • 5 Fitzgerald RC, di Pietro M, Ragunath K et al. British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut 2014; 63: 7-42
  • 6 Chung A, Bourke MJ, Hourigan LF et al. Complete Barrett’s excision by stepwise endoscopic resection in short-segment disease: long term outcomes and predictors of stricture. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 1025-1032
  • 7 Lewis JJ, Rubenstein JH, Singal AG et al. Factors associated with esophageal stricture formation after endoscopic mucosal resection for neoplastic Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 753-760
  • 8 van Vilsteren FG, Pouw RE, Seewald S et al. Stepwise radical endoscopic resection versus radiofrequency ablation for Barrett’s oesophagus with high-grade dysplasia or early cancer: a multicentre randomised trial. Gut 2011; 60: 765-773
  • 9 Straumann A, Conus S, Degen L et al. Budesonide is effective in adolescent and adult patients with active eosinophilic esophagitis. Gastroenterology 2010; 139: 1526-1537 , 1537 e1
  • 10 Szegedi L, Gal I, Kosa I et al. Palliative treatment of esophageal carcinoma with self-expanding plastic stents: a report on 69 cases. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006; 18: 1197-1201
  • 11 Takahashi H, Arimura Y, Okahara S et al. A randomized controlled trial of endoscopic steroid injection for prophylaxis of esophageal stenoses after extensive endoscopic submucosal dissection. BMC Gastroenterol 2015; 15: 1
  • 12 Hochberger J, Koehler P, Wedi E et al. Transplantation of mucosa from stomach to esophagus to prevent stricture after circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection of early squamous cell. Gastroenterology 2014; 146: 906-909
  • 13 Sato H, Inoue H, Kobayashi Y et al. Control of severe strictures after circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection for esophageal carcinoma: oral steroid therapy with balloon dilation or balloon dilation alone. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 78: 250-257
  • 14 Holt BA, Jayasekeran V, Williams SJ et al. Early metal stent insertion fails to prevent stricturing after single-stage complete Barrett’s excision for high-grade dysplasia and early cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 857-864
  • 15 Dellon ES, Sheikh A, Speck O et al. Viscous topical is more effective than nebulized steroid therapy for patients with eosinophilic esophagitis. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 321-324 e1