Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Apr 30;14(5):321.
doi: 10.3390/toxins14050321.

Botulinum Toxin Injection for the Treatment of Upper Esophageal Sphincter Dysfunction

Affiliations
Review

Botulinum Toxin Injection for the Treatment of Upper Esophageal Sphincter Dysfunction

Pengxu Wei. Toxins (Basel). .

Abstract

Dysphagia associated with upper esophageal sphincter (UES) dysfunction remarkably affects the quality of life of patients. UES injection of botulinum toxin is an effective treatment for dysphagia. In comparison with skeletal muscles of the limb and trunk, the UES is a special therapeutic target of botulinum toxin injection, owing to its several anatomical, physiological, and pathophysiological features. This review focuses on (1) the anatomy and function of the UES and the pathophysiology of UES dysfunction in dysphagia and why the entire UES rather than the cricopharyngeal muscle before/during botulinum toxin injection should be examined and targeted; (2) the therapeutic mechanisms of botulinum toxin for UES dysfunction, including the choice of injection sites, dose, and volume; (3) the strengths and weaknesses of guiding techniques, including electromyography, ultrasound, computed tomography, and balloon catheter dilation for botulinum toxin injection of the UES.

Keywords: botulinum toxin; cricopharyngeal muscle; dysphagia; electromyography; injection; ultrasound; upper esophageal sphincter.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author declares no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic diagram of inferior pharyngeal constrictor. Anatomical structures are displayed in the sagittal plane (i.e., lateral view). The approximate location of the vocal folds is indicated.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Schematic diagram of cervical esophagus muscle layers. The esophagus lumen is enclosed by the mucosa of the cervical esophagus. The inner circular layer (in grass green) and outer longitudinal muscle fibers (in pink) are presented. The adventitia of the cervical esophagus is not shown. The inner circular layer is the injection target.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Structures under direct view by flexible endoscopy. The red circle indicates the approximate location of the postcricoid region, where botulinum toxin injection can be administrated into the UES wall under direct view by flexible endoscopy.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Transcutaneous injection approach. A cervical spine magnetic resonance image (MRI) of a young, healthy individual is presented. The UES slightly deviates from the midline to the left. The MRI of the (right) panel is the same as the (left) one and demonstrates three injection approaches as follows: 1, the needle route passes through the thyroid gland; 2 and 3, the needle route passes through the lateral side of the neck to bypass the thyroid gland and big blood vessels.
Figure 5
Figure 5
UES and inflated balloon viewed by ultrasound. The inflated balloon dilation procedure is monitored by ultrasound. The (left) panel is a cross-sectional demonstration. Note that the hypoechoic interface (dark zone) between the thyroid gland and the UES is not the UES wall. The (right) panel presents the balloon moving along the long axis of the UES. See Supplementary Video S1 (corresponding to the (left) panel) and Video S2 (corresponding to the (right) panel) for dynamic display.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Takizawa C., Gemmell E., Kenworthy J., Speyer R.A. Systematic Review of the Prevalence of Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Stroke, Parkinson’s Disease, Alzheimer’s Disease, Head Injury, and Pneumonia. Dysphagia. 2016;31:434–441. doi: 10.1007/s00455-016-9695-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Espinosa-Val M.C., Martín-Martínez A., Graupera M., Arias O., Elvira A., Cabré M., Palomera E., Bolívar-Prados M., Clavé P., Ortega O. Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Complications of Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Older Patients with Dementia. Nutrients. 2020;12:863. doi: 10.3390/nu12030863. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aldridge K.J., Taylor N.F. Dysphagia is a common and serious problem for adults with mental illness: A systematic review. Dysphagia. 2012;27:124–137. doi: 10.1007/s00455-011-9378-5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Madhavan A., LaGorio L.A., Crary M.A., Dahl W.J., Carnaby G.D. Prevalence of and Risk Factors for Dysphagia in the Community Dwelling Elderly: A Systematic Review. J. Nutr. Health Aging. 2016;20:806–815. doi: 10.1007/s12603-016-0712-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jadcherla S. Dysphagia in the high-risk infant: Potential factors and mechanisms. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2016;103:622S–628S. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.115.110106. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Substances