None listed
Conditions
Brief summary
We propose to assess the safety and effectiveness of esophageal dilation at the time of food bolus disimpaction in reducing the risk of recurrent FBO in a retrospective analysis of a prospective database from 2008 to 2017. We aim to compare patients who undergo concurrent esophageal dilation using Savary Gillard dilator catheters at the time of food bolus disimpaction and those who have elective esophageal dilation as an outpatient. We expect that the concurrent esophageal dilation at the time of initial removal of food bolus is safe and effective in reducing the risk of recurrent FBO given it will treat the underlying pathology and stretch the esophagus. As a consequence, the patient does not need to return to hospital for a second endoscopy or represent to hospital with recurrent FBO. This would not only reduce health care cost but also reduce the number of patients presenting to emergency department with recurrent FBO.
Interventions
We propose to assess the safety and effectiveness of esophageal dilation at the time of food bolus disimpaction in reducing the risk of recurrent FBO in a retrospective analysis of a prospective database from 2008 to 2017. We aim to compare patients who undergo concurrent esophageal dilation using Savary Gillard dilator catheters at the time of food bolus disimpaction and those who have elective esophageal dilation as an outpatient.
a) Participant requirement (no involvement, the following dat
We propose to assess the safety and effectiveness of esophageal dilation at the time of food bolus disimpaction in reducing the risk of recurrent FBO in a retrospective analysis of a prospective database from 2008 to 2017. We aim to compare patients who undergo concurrent esophageal dilation using Savary Gillard dilator catheters at the time of food bolus disimpaction and those who have elective esophageal dilation as an outpatient. a) Participant requirement (no involvement, the following data will be collected from each case: • Demographic data, • Clinical presentations • Underlying pathology • Mucosal damage to the esophagus and larynx • Complications after endoscopy such as aspiration, sore throat, GI bleeding. • Hospital stay duration b) the duration of observation/follow-up per participant (Up to 48 hours post-enrolment and 10 days post-enrolment)
Sponsors
Royal Adelaide Hospital
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Age
18 Years to 90 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
• Age 18-90 years • Confirmed acute food bolus requiring endoscopy
Exclusion criteria
• Age <18 • Patients managed medically, not requiring endoscopic retrieval of food bolus
Outcome results
None listed