Risk Factors for Esophageal Stricture in Grade 2b and 3a Corrosive Esophageal Injuries


Background and Purpose

Publications document the risk of developing esophageal stricture as a sequential complication of esophageal injury grades 2b and 3a. Although there are studies describing the risk factors of post-corrosive stricture, there is limited literature on these factors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the different factors with post-corrosive esophageal stricture and non-stricture groups in endoscopic grades 2b and 3a of corrosive esophageal injuries.


Data were retrospectively analyzed in the patients with esophageal injury grades 2b and 3a between January 2011 and December 2017.


One hundred ninety-six corrosive ingestion patients were admitted with 32 patients (15.8%) in grade 2b and 12 patients (6.1%) in grade 3a and stricture was developed in 19 patients (61.3%) with grade 2b and in 10 patients (83.3%) with grade 3a. The patients’ height of the non-stricture group was greater than that of stricture groups (2b stricture group, 1.58 ± 0.08 m; 2b non-stricture group, 1.66 ± 0.07 m; p < 0.004; 3a stricture group, 1.52 ± 0.09 m; 3a non-stricture group, 1.71 ± 0.02 m; p < 0.001). Omeprazole was more commonly used in the non-stricture than stricture group (26.3% in the 2b stricture group, 69.2% in the 2b non-stricture group, p = 0.017; 50% in the 3a stricture group, 100% in the 3a non-stricture group, 1.71 ± 0.02 m, p = 0.015).


The height of patients may help to predict the risks and the prescription of omeprazole may help to minimize the risks of 2b and 3a post-corrosive esophageal stricture.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. 1.

    Havanond C. Clinical features of corrosive ingestion. J Med Assoc Thai. 2003;86(10):918–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Awsakulsutthi S, Havanond C. A retrospective study of anastomotic leakage between patients with and without vascular enhancement of esophageal reconstructions with colon interposition: Thammasat University Hospital experience. Asian J Surg. 2015;38(3):145–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Havanond C, Havanond P. Initial signs and symptoms as prognostic indicators of severe gastrointestinal tract injury due to corrosive ingestion. J Emerg Med. 2007;33(4):349–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Havanond C. Is there a difference between the management of grade 2b and 3 corrosive gastric injuries? J Med Assoc Thai. 2002;85(3):340–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Contini S, Scarpignato C. Caustic injury of the upper gastrointestinal tract: a comprehensive review. World J Gastroenterol. 2013;19(25):3918–30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Are’valo-Silva C, Eliashar R, Wohlgelernter J, Elidan J, Gross M. Ingestion of caustic substances: a 15-year experience. Laryngoscope. 2006;116(8):1422–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Pace F, Antinori S, Repici A. What is new in esophageal injury (infection, drug-induced, caustic, stricture, perforation)? Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2009;25(4):372–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Hugh TB, Kelly MD. Corrosive ingestion and the surgeon. J Am Coll Surg. 1999;189(5):508–22.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Goldman LP, Weigert JM. Corrosive substance ingestion: a review. Am J Gastroenterol 1984;79:85–90.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Zargar SA, Kochhar R, Nagi B, Mehta S, Mehta SK. Ingestion of corrosive acids. Spectrum of injury to upper gastrointestinal tract and natural history. Gastroenterology. 1989;97(3):702–7.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Zargar SA, Kochhar R, Nagi B, Mehta S, Mehta SK. Ingestion of strong corrosive alkalis: spectrum of injury to upper gastrointestinal tract and natural history. Am J Gastroenterol. 1992;87(3):337–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Bonavina L, Chirica M, Skrobic O, Kluger Y, Andreollo NA, Contini S, et al. Foregut caustic injuries: results of the world society of emergency surgery consensus conference. World J Emerg Surg. 2015;10:44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Zargar SA, Kochhar R, Mehta S, Mehta SK. The role of fiberoptic endoscopy in the management of corrosive ingestion and modified endoscopic classification of burns. Gastrointest Endosc. 1991;37(2):165–9.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Cabral C, Chirica M, de Chaisemartin C, Gornet JM, Munoz-Bongrand N, Halimi B, et al. Caustic injuries of the upper digestive tract: a population observational study. Surg Endosc. 2012;26(1):214–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Alipour Faz A, Arsan F, Peyvandi H, Oroei M, Shafagh O, Peyvandi M, et al. Epidemiologic Features and Outcomes of Caustic Ingestions; a 10-Year Cross-Sectional Study. Emerg (Tehran). 2017;5(1):e56.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Ramasamy K, Gumaste VV. Corrosive ingestion in adults. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2003;37(2):199–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Javed A, Pal S, Krishnan EK, Sahni P, Chattopadhyay TK. Surgical management and outcomes of severe gastrointestinal injuries due to corrosive ingestion. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;4(5):121–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Lu LS, Tai WC, Hu ML, Wu KL, Chiu YC. Predicting the progress of caustic injury to complicated gastric outlet obstruction and esophageal stricture, using modified endoscopic mucosal injury grading scale. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:919870.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Le Naoures P, Hamy A, Lerolle N, Métivier E, Lermite E, Venara A. Risk factors for symptomatic esophageal stricture after caustic ingestion-a retrospective cohort study. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30(6):1–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Topaloglu B, Bicakci U, Tander B, Ariturk E, Kilicoglu-Aydin B, Aydin O, et al. Biochemical and histopathologic effects of omeprazole and vitamin E in rats with corrosive esophageal burns. Pediatr Surg Int. 2008;24(5):555–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Cakal B, Akbal E, Köklü S, Babalı A, Koçak E, Taş A. Acute therapy with intravenous omeprazole on caustic esophageal injury: a prospective case series. Dis Esophagus. 2013;26(1):22–6.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Arisawa T, Harata M, Kamiya Y, Shibata T, Nagasaka M, Nakamura M, et al. Is omeprazole or misoprostol superior for improving indomethacin-induced delayed maturation of granulation tissue in rat gastric ulcers? Digestion. 2006;73(1):32–9.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Biswas K, Bandyopatdhyay U, Chattopadyay I, Varadaraj A. A novel antioxidant and anti-apoptotic role of omeprazole to block gastric ulcer through scavenging of hydroxyl radical. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(13):10993–1001.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Kil BJ, Kim IW, Shin CY, Jeong JH, Jun CH, Lee SM, et al. Comparison of IY81149 with omeprazole in rat reflux oesophagitis. J Auton Pharmacol. 2000;20(5–6):291–6.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Kim YJ, Lee JS, Hong KS, Chung JW, Kim JH, Hahm KB. Novel application of proton pump inhibitor for the prevention of colitis-induced colorectal carcinogenesis beyond acid suppression. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2010;3(8):963–74.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Kobayashi T, Ohta Y, Inui K, Yoshino J, Nakazawa S. Protective effect of omeprazole against acute gastric mucosal lesions induced by compound 48/80, a mast cell degranulator, in rats. Pharmacol Res. 2002;46(1):75–84.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Pozzoli C, Menozzi A, Grandi D, Solenghi E, Ossiprandi MC, Zullian C, et al. Protective effects of proton pump inhibitors against indomethacin-induced lesions in the rat small intestine. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2007;374(4):283–91.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references


The authors would like to thank staff members of Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, for the data of this study and special thanks to Norman Mangnall for assistance in editing the English version of this manuscript.

Author information




All of the author and co-author listed: Prasit Mahawongkajit, Prakitpunthu Tomtitchong, Nuttorn Boochangkool, Palin Limpavitayaporn, Amonpon Kanlerd, Chatchai Mingmalairak, Surajit Awsakulsutthi, and Chittinad Havanond, followed the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE); all of the author listed in this manuscript met the four criteria of the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Prasit Mahawongkajit.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mahawongkajit, P., Tomtitchong, P., Boochangkool, N. et al. Risk Factors for Esophageal Stricture in Grade 2b and 3a Corrosive Esophageal Injuries. J Gastrointest Surg 22, 1659–1664 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-018-3822-x

Download citation


  • Corrosive esophageal injury
  • Caustic injury
  • Esophageal stricture