Comparative observation on different intervention procedures in benign stricture of gastrointestinal tract

Table 1 Incidence of complications following treatment with different intervention procedures (%)

Groups	Patient	Number (%)	Number (%)	Number (%)	Number (%) with
	numbers (n)	with pain (n)	with reflux (n)	with bleeding (n)	stent migration (n)
A	80	20 (25.0%)	16(20.0%)	6(7.5%)	-
B	25	10 (40.0%)	15(60.0%)	3(12.0%)	4 (16.0%)
C	75	30 (40.0%)	9(12.0%)	12(16.0%)	-

Table 2 Dysphagia relapse rate during follow-up

Groups	6 months follow-up		12 months follow-up
	Number tested (n)	Number (%) with DR (n)	Number tested (n)	Number (%) with DR(n)
A	80	24(30%)	80	48(60%)
B	25	5(20%)	12	3(25%)
C	75	9(12%)	50	8(16%)

DR: dysphagia relapse.

Table 3 Strategies of intervention procedure for different benign strictures in upper gastrointestinal tract

Types of GIT stricture	Strategies
AS	TCSD > PD > PCSD > PUCSD
AS with fistula	PCSD > TCSD
New scar stricture	TCSD >PD > PCSD
Scar stricture	PCSD > TCSD > PD
Functional stricture (achalasia)	TCSD > PD > PCSD with antireflux

AS: anastomosis stricture, TCSD: temporary covered stent dilation, PD: pneumatic dilation, PCSD: permanent covered stent dilation, PUCSD: permanent uncovered stent dilation.