Endoscopic Dilation with Bougies versus Balloon Dilation in Esophageal Benign Strictures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Table 1

Characteristic of the included studies. Yamamoto et al. and Saeed et al. did not specify the etiology of the BESs.

Study	Control ()	Intervention ()	Population
Shemesh, 90	Savary-Gilliard (30); Dilation with bougies up to 17 mm	Microvasive (30); Dilation with balloons up to 18 mm	Peptic stricture (39); Caustic stricture (11); Postoperative (10)
Yamamoto, 92	Eder-Puestow (16); Dilation with bougies up to 15 mm	Medi-Tech (15); Dilation with balloons up to 20 mm	n/a
Cox, 94	Celestin + Eder-Puestow (39); Dilation with Celestin bougies up to 18 mm, followed by Eder-Puestow bougies up to 19.3 mm	Rigiflex Microvasive (46); Dilation with balloons up to 20 mm	Peptic stricture (61); Barrett’s esophagus (8); Postoperative (11); Postesclerotherapy (1); Postcricoid (1); Systemic sclerosis (2); Caustic stricture (1)
Saeed, 95	Savary-Gilliard (17); Dilation with bougies up to 15 mm	Rigiflex Microvasive (17); Dilation with balloons up to 15 mm	n/a
Scolapio, 99	Savary-Gilliard (88); Dilation with bougies up to 17 mm	Bard (82) + Microvasive (81); Dilation with balloons up to 15 mm	Peptic stricture (114); Schatzki ring (139)

n/a: not applicable.