Original Article

Effectiveness of Esophageal Dilation in Relieving Nonobstructive Esophageal Dysphagia and Improving Quality of Life

Authors: Kalyana Lavu, MD, Thomas P. Mathew, MD, Anil Minocha, MD

Abstract

Objectives: The role of empiric esophageal dilation in improving esophageal dysphagia with nonobstructive esophageal lumen is not clear. We wished to determine the impact of esophageal dilation with a large-diameter dilator on dysphagia and quality of life in such patients. We also assessed relative prevalence of esophageal versus oropharyngeal dysphagia and nonobstructive versus obstructive esophageal dysphagia in ambulatory patients.


Methods: Ambulatory patients presenting with swallowing complaints were evaluated by history and physical examination, speech therapy evaluation, dynamic barium oropharyngeal swallowing study, and barium esophagram plus upper endoscopy. Patients diagnosed as having nonobstructive esophageal dysphagia were offered participation in the study. Eligible candidates were randomized to either 56-French (the study group) or 40-French (the control group) Pilling dilators. All patients were treated with proton pump inhibitors. Patients completed questionnaires for dysphagia score, diet score, and quality of life (SF-36) at baseline, at 1 month, and then at follow-up visits at 1- to 3-month intervals for up to 12 months.


Results: Of the 125 patients complaining of swallowing difficulties, 6 (5%) were diagnosed as having oropharyngeal dysphagia and 119 (95%) had esophageal dysphagia. Of the patients with esophageal dysphagia, 84 (67%) had nonobstructive dysphagia. A total of 30 patients participated in the study. Seventeen patients were randomized to the study group and 13 were randomized to the control group. The baseline dysphagia, diet, and quality-of-life scores were comparable between groups. Dysphagia in both groups improved after dilation compared with baseline; however, the difference in the degree of improvement between the two groups was not significant. In addition, there was no significant difference in improvement of the quality of life between the two groups.


Conclusion: Most patients with esophageal dysphagia have a nonobstructing esophageal lumen. Our prospective, randomized, controlled study does not support the practice of empiric esophageal dilation for patients with nonobstructive esophageal dysphagia. Improvement in both groups suggests the possibility that it occurred due to proton pump inhibitor therapy, lending credence to the hypothesis that esophageal hypersensitivity to acid contributes to symptoms in most patients with nonobstructive esophageal dysphagia, which is the predominant category of dysphagia.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Lindgren S, Janzon L. Prevalence of swallowing complaints and clinical findings among 50–79-year-old men and women in an urban population. Dysphagia 1991; 6: 187–192.
 
2. Shaukat M, Ramirez FC, Sanowski RA. Community experience in esophageal dilation: Techniques and complications. Am J Gastroenterol 1994; 89: 1627(abstract).
 
3. Graham DY. Treatment of benign and malignant strictures of the esophagus, in Silvis SE (ed): Therapeutic Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. New York, Igaku-Shoin, 1990, ed 2, pp 1–41.
 
4. Webb WA, McDaniel L, Jones L. Endoscopic evaluation of dysphagia in two hundred and ninety-three patients with benign disease. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1984; 158: 152–156.
 
5. Marshall JB, Chowdhury TA. Does empiric esophageal dilation benefit dysphagia when endoscopy is normal? Dig Dis Sci 1996; 41: 1099–1101.
 
6. Castell DO. Approach to the patient with dysphagia, in Yamada T (ed): Textbook of Gastroenterology. Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott, 1995, ed 2, pp 638–648.
 
7. Richter JE. Dysphagia, odynophagia, heartburn and other esophageal symptoms, in Feldman M, Scharschmidt B, Sleisinger M (eds): Gastrointestinal and Liver Disease. Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders, 1998, ed 6, pp 97–105.
 
8. Dakkak M, Bennett JR. A new dysphagia score with objective validation. J Clin Gastroenterol 1992; 14: 99–100.
 
9. Chotiprasidhi P, Minocha A. Effectiveness of single dilation with Maloney dilator versus endoscopic rupture of Schatzki’s ring using biopsy forceps. Dig Dis Sci 2000; 45: 281–284.
 
10. Stewart AL, Hays RD, Ware JE Jr. The MOS short-form general health survey: Reliability and validity in a patient population. Med Care 1988; 26: 724–735.
 
11. Colon VJ, Young MA, Ramirez FC. The short- and long-term efficacy of empirical esophageal dilation in patients with nonobstructive dysphagia: A prospective, randomized study. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 910–913.
 
12. Scolapio JS, Gostout CJ, Schroeder KW, et al. Dysphagia without endoscopically evident disease: To dilate or not? Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96: 327–330.
 
13. Webb WA. Esophageal dilation: Personal experience with current instruments and techniques. Am J Gastroenterol 1988; 83: 471–475.
 
14. Triadafilopoulos G. Nonobstructive dysphagia in reflux esophagitis. Am J Gastroenterol 1989; 84: 614–618.
 
15. Jacob P, Kahrilas PJ, Vanagunas A. Peristaltic dysfunction associated with nonobstructive dysphagia in reflux disease. Dig Dis Sci 1990; 35: 939–942.
 
16. Kahrilas PJ. Gastroesophageal reflux disease and its complications, in Feldman M, Scharschmidt B, Sleisinger M (eds): Gastrointestinal and Liver Disease. Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders, 1998, ed 6, pp 498–517.