TY - JOUR
T1 - A protocolized approach to endoscopic hydrostatic versus pneumatic balloon dilation therapy for gastric sleeve stenosis
T2 - a multicenter study and meta-analysis
AU - Jaruvongvanich, Veeravich
AU - Matar, Reem
AU - Beran, Azizullah
AU - Maselli, Daniel B.
AU - Storm, Andrew C.
AU - Gómez, Victoria
AU - Vargas, Eric J.
AU - Kellogg, Todd A.
AU - McKenzie, Travis J.
AU - Pannala, Rahul
AU - Galvao Neto, Manoel
AU - Texeira, Andre
AU - Abu Dayyeh, Barham K.
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr. Abu Dayyeh is consultant for Metamodix, BFKW, DyaMx, Boston Scientific, USGI medical, and Endo-TAGSS; he also received research support form Apollo Endosurgery, USGI, Spatz Medical, Boston Scientific, GI Dynamics, Cairn Diagnostics, Aspire Bariatrics, and Medtronic; and he served as a speaker for Johnson and Johnson, Endogastric Solutions, and Olympus. Dr. Pannala is a consultant for HCL Technologies and the recipient of research support from Apollo Endosurgery and Boston Scientific. Dr. Storm is a consultant for Apollo Endosurgery, ERBE, GI Dynamics, and Endo-TAGSS, and the recipient of research support from Boston Scientific. Dr. Victoria Gómez is a consultant for Olympus America. Dr. Galvao Neto is a consultant for Fractyl Labs, GI Dynamics, GI windows, Apollo Endosurgery, USGI, Colubris Mx, Ethicon EndoSurgery, Meditronics, and Olympus; and he is also a member of the Keyron Scientific Advisory Board. All other authors have no commercial associations that might be a conflict of interest in relation to this article.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 American Society for Bariatric Surgery
PY - 2020/10
Y1 - 2020/10
N2 - Background: Gastric sleeve stenosis (GSS) is reported in .7% to 4% of cases after sleeve gastrectomy. Two endoscopic balloon dilation techniques are available with no clear consensus on the therapeutic approach. Objectives: To compare the treatment efficacy and safety between hydrostatic and pneumatic balloon dilations for GSS. Setting: Academic referral centers, United States and a meta-analysis. Methods: Consecutive patients who presented with GSS and underwent endoscopic hydrostatic and/or pneumatic balloon dilations at 3 tertiary care hospitals were included. Clinical success was defined as an improvement of symptoms that allowed the patient to avoid further interventions. A systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant studies for meta-analysis. Results: Of 46 patients, 13 had pneumatic dilation only, 26 had hydrostatic dilation only, and 7 had pneumatic dilation after failed hydrostatic dilation. Clinical success was not significantly different among the 3 groups with the success rates of 30.8%, 57.6%, and 57.1% (P = .25) after single dilation and 61.5%, 63.6%, and 71.4% (P = .90) after serial dilations in the pneumatic group, hydrostatic group, and pneumatic after failed hydrostatic group, respectively. Patients who failed hydrostatic balloon dilation (n = 7) had a success rate of 71.4% with subsequent pneumatic dilation. Two serious adverse events were observed in the pneumatic group, whereas none were observed in the hydrostatic group. A meta-analysis of 16 studies involving 360 patients demonstrated higher clinical success with single pneumatic balloon dilation compared with hydrostatic balloon dilation (62.2% versus 36.4%; P = .007) with higher adverse events (3 versus 0 events). Conclusions: Hydrostatic balloon dilation should be considered as an initial modality for GSS given its acceptable success rate and high safety profile. In those who fail hydrostatic balloon dilation, a subsequent step-up approach to pneumatic balloon dilation or revisional surgery should be attempted.
AB - Background: Gastric sleeve stenosis (GSS) is reported in .7% to 4% of cases after sleeve gastrectomy. Two endoscopic balloon dilation techniques are available with no clear consensus on the therapeutic approach. Objectives: To compare the treatment efficacy and safety between hydrostatic and pneumatic balloon dilations for GSS. Setting: Academic referral centers, United States and a meta-analysis. Methods: Consecutive patients who presented with GSS and underwent endoscopic hydrostatic and/or pneumatic balloon dilations at 3 tertiary care hospitals were included. Clinical success was defined as an improvement of symptoms that allowed the patient to avoid further interventions. A systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant studies for meta-analysis. Results: Of 46 patients, 13 had pneumatic dilation only, 26 had hydrostatic dilation only, and 7 had pneumatic dilation after failed hydrostatic dilation. Clinical success was not significantly different among the 3 groups with the success rates of 30.8%, 57.6%, and 57.1% (P = .25) after single dilation and 61.5%, 63.6%, and 71.4% (P = .90) after serial dilations in the pneumatic group, hydrostatic group, and pneumatic after failed hydrostatic group, respectively. Patients who failed hydrostatic balloon dilation (n = 7) had a success rate of 71.4% with subsequent pneumatic dilation. Two serious adverse events were observed in the pneumatic group, whereas none were observed in the hydrostatic group. A meta-analysis of 16 studies involving 360 patients demonstrated higher clinical success with single pneumatic balloon dilation compared with hydrostatic balloon dilation (62.2% versus 36.4%; P = .007) with higher adverse events (3 versus 0 events). Conclusions: Hydrostatic balloon dilation should be considered as an initial modality for GSS given its acceptable success rate and high safety profile. In those who fail hydrostatic balloon dilation, a subsequent step-up approach to pneumatic balloon dilation or revisional surgery should be attempted.
KW - Gastric sleeve stenosis
KW - Hydrostatic balloon dilation
KW - Pneumatic balloon dilation
KW - Sleeve gastrectomy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85087397225&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85087397225&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.soard.2020.05.009
DO - 10.1016/j.soard.2020.05.009
M3 - Article
C2 - 32641283
AN - SCOPUS:85087397225
SN - 1550-7289
VL - 16
SP - 1543
EP - 1553
JO - Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases
JF - Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases
IS - 10
ER -