Achalasia 2016: Treatment Alternatives

Peroral endoscopic myotomy vs laparoscopic myotomy and partial fundoplication for esophageal achalasia: A single-center randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Achalasia is a rare benign esophageal motor disorder characterized by incomplete relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). The treatment of achalasia is not curative, but rather is aimed at reducing LES pressure. In patients who have failed noninvasive therapy, surgery should be considered. Myotomy with partial fundoplication has been considered the first-line treatment for non-advanced achalasia. Recently, peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), a technique that employs the principles of submucosal endoscopy to perform the equivalent of a surgical myotomy, has emerged as a promising minimally invasive technique for the management of this condition.

AIM

To compare POEM and laparoscopic myotomy and partial fundoplication (LM-PF) regarding their efficacy and outcomes for the treatment of achalasia.

METHODS

Forty treatment-naive adult patients who had been diagnosed with achalasia based on clinical and manometric criteria (dysphagia score ≥ II and Eckardt score > 3) were randomized to undergo either LM-PF or POEM. The outcome measures were anesthesia time, procedure time, symptom improvement, reflux esophagitis (as determined with the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire), barium column height at 1 and 5 min (on a barium esophagogram), pressure at the LES, the occurrence of adverse events (AEs), length of stay (LOS), and quality of life (QoL).

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between the LM-PF and POEM groups regarding symptom improvement at 1, 6, and 12 mo of follow-up (P = 0.192, P = 0.242, and P = 0.242, respectively). However, the rates of reflux esophagitis at 1, 6, and 12 mo of follow-up were significantly higher in the POEM group (P = 0.014, P < 0.001, and P = 0.002, respectively). There were also no statistical differences regarding the manometry values, the occurrence of AEs, or LOS. Anesthesia time and procedure time were significantly shorter in the POEM group than in the LM-PF group (185.00 ± 56.89 and 95.70 ± 30.47 min vs 296.75 ± 56.13 and 218.75 ± 50.88 min, respectively; P = 0.001 for both). In the POEM group, there were improvements in all domains of the QoL questionnaire, whereas there were improvements in only three domains in the LM-PF group.

CONCLUSION

POEM and LM-PF appear to be equally effective in controlling the symptoms of achalasia, shortening LOS, and minimizing AEs. Nevertheless, POEM has the advantage of improving all domains of QoL, and shortening anesthesia and procedure times but with a significantly higher rate of gastroesophageal reflux.

Surgical treatment of relapsed megaesophagus

OBJECTIVE

to analyze the surgical treatment of patients with recurrent megaesophagus followed at the esophageal-stomach-duodenal outpatient clinic of the Hospital de Clínicas - UNICAMP.

METHODS

a retrospective study, from 2011 to 2017, with 26 patients with Chagas or idiopathic megaesophagus, surgically treated, and who recurred with dysphagia. Clinical, endoscopic and radiographic aspects were assessed and correlated with the performed surgical procedures.

RESULTS

50% had dysphagia for liquids, 69% regurgitation, 65.3% heartburn, 69.2% weight loss and 69.2% had Chagas disease. In addition, 38.4% had megaesophagus stage 1 and 2 and 61.5% stage 3 and 4. Regarding the reoperations, 53% of them underwent Heller-Pinotti surgery by laparoscopy, Serra-Dória in 30.7% and esophageal mucosectomy in 7.9%. In 72% of the reoperations there were no postoperative complications, and 80% of the patients had a good outcome, with reduction or elimination of dysphagia. Among the reoperated patients undergoing the laparoscopic Heller-Pinotti technique, three reported little improvement of dysphagia in the postoperative period and among those who underwent Serra-Dória surgery, 100% had no dysphagia. It was observed that, when the time between the first procedure and the reoperation was longer, the better the surgical result was, with statistical significant decreased dysphagia (p=0.0013, p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

there was a preference to perform laparoscopic re-miotomy and, as a second option, Serra-Dória surgery, for patients with recurrent megaesophagus. Esophagectomy or esophageal mucosectomy were reserved for more severe patients.

EVALUATION OF ESOPHAGEAL ACHALASIA: FROM SYMPTOMS TO THE CHICAGO CLASSIFICATION

INTRODUCTION

The diagnosis of achalasia may be suggested by clinical features but a complete work-up is required not only to confirm the diagnosis but also to grade the disease by severity or clinical subtype.

OBJECTIVE

To review the current evaluation of esophageal achalasia and its correct comprehension.

METHOD

The literature review was based on papers published on Medline/Pubmed, SciELO and Lilacs, crossing the following headings: "esophageal achalasia"; "deglutition disorders"; "diagnostic techniques", "digestive system"; "endoscopy, digestive system"; "manometry".

RESULTS

The diagnosis of achalasia is suggested by clinical features but is not sufficient to distinguish this from other esophageal disease. It must be confirmed by further diagnostic tests, such as esophagogastroduodenoscopy, barium swallow and manometry. Recent advances in diagnostic methods, including high resolution manometry might even help predicting outcome or selected more appropriate procedures to treat the disease.

CONCLUSION

A detailed and systematic study of achalasia patients allows not only a correct diagnosis but also contributes to therapeutic decision making and prognosis.

Understanding the Chicago Classification: From Tracings to Patients

Current parameters of the Chicago classification include assessment of the esophageal body (contraction vigour and peristalsis), lower esophageal sphincter relaxation pressure, and intra-bolus pressure pattern. Esophageal disorders include achalasia, esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction, major disorders of peristalsis, and minor disorders of peristalsis. Sub-classification of achalasia in types I, II, and III seems to be useful to predict outcomes and choose the optimal treatment approach. The real clinical significance of other new parameters and disorders is still under investigation.