Commercially available biological mesh does not prevent stricture after esophageal mucosectomy

Steve J. Schomisch, Liming Yu, Yuhsin Wu, Eric M. Pauli, Cassandra Cipriano, Amitabh Chak, Richard H. Lash, Jeffrey L. Ponsky, Jeffrey M. Marks

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

15 Scopus citations


Background and study aims: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) offers a minimally invasive therapy for advanced esophageal dysplasia and early cancers but stricture formation limits its applicability. We aimed at assessing the efficacy of placement of a commercially available biological mesh for preventing stricture formation following esophageal EMR. Methods: 25 swine were submitted to circumferential esophageal EMR with 10-cm extent and divided in five groups: one group with EMR only (control); one receiving an uncovered stent (stent-only group); and three groups receiving a stent covered with one of three extracellular matrices, namely small intestine submucosa (SIS group), acellular dermal matrix (ADMgroup), or urinary bladder matrix (UBM group). Stricture formation was evaluated with weekly esophagograms. Results: The stent-only group had significantly less stricture formation and survival was extended compared with controls (4.8 vs. 2.4 weeks). Compared with stenting only, the addition of a biological mesh did not reduce stricture formation: percent reductions in esophageal diameter for the groups were SIS 86%, ADM94%, and UBM 94%, compared with 82% in the stent-only group. Conclusions: Placement of commercially available biological meshes did not alter remodeling sufficiently to prevent stricture formation after esophageal EMR.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)144-148
Number of pages5
Issue number2
StatePublished - Feb 2014

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Gastroenterology


Dive into the research topics of 'Commercially available biological mesh does not prevent stricture after esophageal mucosectomy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this