Montgomery Salivary Bypass Tube vs Self-Expandable Metal Stents for the treatment of esophageal strictures after total laryngectomy: a crossover study.

OBJECTIVES

Dysphagia affects 16% of patients undergoing total laryngectomy; of these, a third is due to pharyngoesophageal stenosis. Currently, the treatment is cyclic dilation of the stricture and Montgomery Salivary Bypass Tube (MSBT) application. The aim of this study is to assess whether using Self-Expandable Metal Stent (SEMS) may give better results after a non-durable response to repeated dilatation and application of MSBT.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

We verified whether using SEMS after at least 3 cyclic dilations and application of MSBT results in a longer dysphagia-free time in laryngectomized patients with pharyngolesopha-geal stenosis. Secondary outcomes were the duration of the procedures, radiation exposure and complications.

RESULTS

We enrolled 6 patients with a median age of 65 years (QR 62.5 - 75.75), of which 50% had undergone radiotherapy. Friedman's test for the duration of the dysphagia-free period did not show a statistically significant difference between the two groups (Friedman chi-squared = 2.6667, df = 1, p-value = 0.1025). The time required to implant the MSBT was significantly less than that required to implant the SEMS (Friedman chi-squared = 6, df = 1, p-value = 0.01431). Radiation exposure was absent for MSBT, while SEMS implant required an exposure to X-rays during the procedure and after 48 hours for placement verification. Two patients experienced short-term complications after SEMS implantation and one after two weeks from MSBT implantation; none of them had any health consequences.

CONCLUSION

In patients who are already undergoing cyclic dilations and application of MSBT, switching to SEMS is not beneficial. Furthermore, MSBT has a significantly shorter implant procedure, does not expose the patient to X-rays, and, in the absence of complications, has a longer duration before removal.