Endoscopic stricturotomy versus ileocolonic resection in the treatment of ileocolonic anastomotic strictures in Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic stricturotomy (ESt) is a novel technique in the treatment of anastomotic strictures in Crohn's disease (CD). The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of patients with ileocolonic anastomotic stricture treated with ESt versus ileocolonic resection (ICR).

METHODS

This historical cohort study included consecutive CD patients with ileocolonic anastomotic stricture treated with ESt or ICR from 2010 to 2017. The primary outcomes were surgery-free survival and postprocedural adverse events.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients treated with ESt and 147 patients treated with ICR were analyzed. Median follow-up was .8 years (interquartile range [IQR], .2-1.7) and 2.2 years (IQR, 1.2-4.4) in the ESt and ICR groups, respectively (P < .001). Subsequent stricture-related surgery was needed in 4 patients (11.3%) receiving ESt and in 15 patients (10.2%) receiving ICR (P = .83). Kaplan-Meier analysis also showed no statistical difference regarding surgery-free survival between the 2 groups (P = .24). Procedure-related major adverse events were documented in 5 of 49 patients (10.2% per procedure) undergoing ESt and 47 patients (31.9%) undergoing ICR (P = .003). Risk factors for decreased surgery-free survival on multivariate analysis included preprocedural corticosteroids (hazard ratio [HR], 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-8.1), multiple strictures (HR, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.7-14.2), and increased disease-related hospitalizations (HR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.2-13.0).

CONCLUSIONS

With the limitation of a shorter follow-up, ESt achieved comparable surgery-free survival with a decreased morbidity when compared with ICR.