ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2025
Innovative endoscopic alternatives for the conservative management of recurrent/refractory esophageal strictures in children: A case series.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRefractory esophageal strictures (ES) are defined an anatomical restriction without an active endoscopic inflammation resulting in dysphagia after a minimum of five seriated dilatations in a 4-weeks interval. Recurrent ES (REES) refer to the inability to maintain a satisfactory luminal diameter for four weeks once an age-appropriate feeding diameter was achieved. Seriated endoscopic dilations are the reference maintenance for ES in pediatric age. Iterative dilations increase the risk of complications and may cause significant organic and psychological consequences in children and excessive costs for families and health systems. Furthermore, fibrotic modifications can make the surgery even more challenging. The surgical approach is burdened by high morbidity, with prolonged hospitalization and delayed oral refeeding in fragile patients with comorbidities.
aimTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of the most recent adjuvant treatments, with the aim of avoiding or, at least, postponing surgery.
methodsIntralesional steroids or mitomycin C injections with antiproliferative and anti-fibroblastic properties have been attempted, but have been abandoned because of systemic adsorption, local complications, or lack of efficacy. Self-expanding metal stents are generally designed for the palliation of neoplastic strictures in adults and rarely employed in pediatrics because of the high risk of complications, in terms of stent migration, local pain and perforation. Our group developed a customized dynamic esophageal stent to stabilize esophageal patency and promote continuous dilatation determined by the food passage between the stent and the REES wall, but it requires an appropriate diameter for placement.
resultsRecently peroral endoscopic tunneling for restoration of the esophagus has been employed to treat esophageal obstructions exploiting the submucosal space. Re-absorbable self-expanding stents (like SX-ELLA Stent Esophageal Degradable BD-BD stent) and energy-delivering surgical devices (HARMONIC ACE
conclusionAfter an overview about the historically applied adjuvant therapies, we aim to update the common knowledge with our recent experience of these new minimally invasive options for pediatric REES and refractory ES in three exemplary cases, focusing on their mid-term effectiveness and safety for the purpose of maintain the patency after standard endoscopic dilations and avoiding or, at least, postponing an invasive replacement surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.