Peroral endoscopic myotomy versus surgical myotomy for primary achalasia: single-center, retrospective analysis of 74 patients

Achalasia: laparoscopic Heller myotomy with fundoplication versus peroral endoscopic myotomy-a systematic review and meta-analysis

There are various therapeutic options for achalasia. Nevertheless, peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and laparoscopic Heller myotomy with fundoplication (LHM) are distinguished by their efficacy and low incidence of complications. Compare POEM and LHM regarding several outcomes in patients with achalasia. This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. An exhaustive literature search was performed using PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. Studies comparing several outcomes between POEM and LHM in patients with achalasia were included. Data on clinical success, operative time, intraoperative complications, length of stay, reintervention rates, postoperative pain, overall complications, occurrence of GERD symptoms, use of proton bomb inhibitors and esophagitis were extracted. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the MINORS scale. We included 20 retrospective observational studies with a combined total of 5139 participants. The results demonstrated that there was no statistically significant difference in terms of intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, reintervention rate, occurrence of GERD symptoms, GERD HRQL, use of proton pump inhibitors, and esophagitis between POEM and LHM groups. Conversely, POEM was associated with higher clinical success and shorter operative time, length of stay, and postoperative pain. This meta-analysis concludes that both POEM and LHM, are effective and safe treatments for achalasia. However, POEM demonstrates better results regarding clinical success, operative time, length of stay, postoperative pain, and a tendency towards lower recurrence.

Peroral endoscopic myotomy compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy and pneumatic dilation in the treatment of achalasia: a systematic review

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is an intervention for the treatment of achalasia which has gained popularity over the last decade. It's efficacy and invasiveness are comparable to laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM). The purpose of this systematic review is to compare POEM to existing therapies. The systematic review was performed following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Libraries were searched using keywords: esophageal achalasia, POEM, LHM, pneumatic dilation (PD), and related terms. The studied outcomes were Eckardt score, clinical success, hospital stay, cost-utility analysis, complications, and post-treatment gastro-esophageal reflux disease. Articles were reviewed by one researcher and uncertainty was resolved by a second researcher. The search strategy retrieved 1948 citations. After removing duplicates and applying the exclusion criteria, 91 studies were selected for full-text review of which a total of 31 studies were considered eligible for further analysis, including two studies which were found through manual searching. POEM has improved efficacy compared to PD with similar cost-effectiveness. POEM results showed comparable patient outcomes when compared with laparoscopic myotomy. Overall, POEM is a feasible first-line treatment for achalasia.

Comparison of the Clinical Efficacy, Safety, and Postoperative Outcomes Between Peroral Esophageal Myotomy and Laparoscopic Heller's Myotomy With Fundoplication: A Systematic Review

Achalasia, a neurodegenerative disease caused by the progressive destruction of ganglion cells in the myenteric plexus, is accompanied by incomplete relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter. Laparoscopic Heller's myotomy (LHM) coupled with fundoplication has been the gold standard procedure for achalasia. Peroral esophageal myotomy (POEM) has recently gained popularity as it is minimally invasive, has fewer adverse events, and has excellent short-term outcomes. So, we aimed to compare the clinical efficacy, safety, and postoperative outcomes between LHM and POEM. We did a systematic review by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for 2020 and exploring research databases such as PUBMED and PMC Central, Google Scholar, and Research Gate. After appropriate screenings, articles relevant to the review were scrutinized based on the eligibility criteria. Quality assessment tools such as the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the assessment of multiple systematic reviews (AMSTAR) were used to finalize the articles. A total of 11 articles (seven observational studies, two RCTs, and two systematic reviews) were included in the review after a quality check. The study included 2127 patients, classified into 981 for POEM and 1146 for LHM, who had undergone treatment for achalasia. Most of the studies had a follow-up of ≤ two years. Comparing efficacy, POEM had similar results to LHM in terms of Eckardt scores. However, abnormal DeMeester scores were found in POEM. Adverse events were significantly higher in LHM when compared to POEM in terms of safety. Peroral esophageal myotomy also stood out as having a shorter procedure time, a shorter hospital stay, and lesser odds of being a clinical failure. As for postoperative outcomes, despite treatment with proton pump inhibitors, LHM was more effective in preventing the development of esophagitis compared to POEM due to partial fundoplication. Postoperative reflux and the development of esophagitis remain certain with POEM and need to be followed up with more studies with longer follow-ups. However, POEM still stands as a better choice compared to LHM in terms of efficacy and safety.

Major adverse events related to endoscopic or laparoscopic procedures in achalasia. A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Surgical or endoscopic treatments play an essential role in the management of achalasia. The probability of adverse events in the performance of said treatments is a relevant aspect, when establishing the risk-benefit balance. The present study aimed to establish the association between serious adverse events and the performance of those procedures, in adult patients with achalasia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systemic search of randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials, retrospective cohorts, and cases series on adult patients with achalasia that underwent laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM), peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), or endoscopic balloon dilation, that reported serious adverse events, was carried out on the Medline, CENTRAL, and EBSCO databases. Serious adverse events were defined as: death at 30 days, Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher classification, esophageal or gastric perforation, pneumothorax, mucosal tear, leakage, emphysema, pneumonia, and chest pain. The methodology included the PRISMA guidelines for reporting systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies were found that reported information on 1,276 patients that underwent POEM, 5,492 that underwent LHM, and 10,346 that underwent endoscopic balloon dilation. The proportions of adverse events for the three techniques were 3.6, 4.9, and 3.1%, respectively.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The 3 therapeutic interventions evaluated had similar proportions of adverse events. There were few reports of death at 30 days as an outcome and the lack of standardization in reporting adverse events in the studies analyzed was prominent.

Gastroesophageal Reflux Waning Over Time in Endoscopic Versus Surgical Myotomy for the Treatment of Achalasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and Heller myotomy with fundoplication (HMF) effectively treat achalasia, an esophageal motor disease. Although a significant number of meta-analyses have compared POEM and HMF, these studies showed discrepant postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) conclusions. This review aimed to objectively compare GERD over time, as well as the efficiency, safety, and adverse events in POEM versus HMF for treating achalasia. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis by searching Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Clinicaltrials.gov. The evaluated outcomes included early (within 12 months) and late (beyond 12 months) endoscopic assessment of GERD using the Lyon Consensus, clinical success, operative duration (OD), length of stay (LOS), and major adverse events (MAE). A total of 29 observational studies and two randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with 13,914 patients were included. GERD was 28% higher among RCTs discussing POEM at early assessment (95%CI 0.02, 0.54) and was not different at late evaluation (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.00, 0.22). No difference in reflux was observed among observational studies in both periods. The clinical success was 9% higher (95% CI = 0.05, 0.12), and the OD was 37.74 minutes shorter (95% CI = -55.44, -20.04) in POEM among observational studies, whereas it was not different among RCTs. The LOS and MAE were similar in the groups. Comparisons among studies yielded divergent results. RCTs revealed that POEM had a higher incidence of GERD in the early assessment, whereas observational studies showed higher clinical success and a shorter OD in POEM. Ultimately, the between-group difference waned over time in GERD in all comparisons, resulting in no difference among RCTs in the late evaluation. Our meta-analysis demonstrated a non-preferential treatment of achalasia between endoscopic or surgical cardiomyotomy, prioritizing an individualized approach in the long term.

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.

An Updated Meta-analysis: Similar Clinical Efficacy of Anterior and Posterior Approaches in Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM) for Achalasia

Introduction

Currently, there are few studies on the efficacy of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in the anterior or posterior approach; however, limited studies have shown contradictory findings. Thus, the goal was to obtain more quantitative and objective outcomes and further compare the clinical efficacy of these two approaches in this meta-analysis.

Methods

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted to find studies relevant to POEM. The retrieval time was from database inception to September 2021. Studies reporting the effects of POEM according to the anterior or posterior approach were included. STATA 16.0 was used to perform statistical analysis, mainly comparing the quantitative objective indicators (lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure and Eckardt scores, etc.) in anterior and posterior approaches by meta-analysis.

Result

A total of 19 studies with 1261 patients were finally included. Except for shorter procedure time in the posterior approach, other factors (pooled difference of LES pressure, Eckardt scores, clinical success, length of total myotomy, hospital stays, gastroesophageal reflux (GERD), and adverse event) were compared, and all above confirmed that there is no difference between anterior and posterior approaches, and the safety of POEM is ensured. In addition, both anterior and posterior myotomy can improve LES pressure and Eckardt scores, and the difference in anterior and posterior myotomy was unconspicuous.

Conclusion

The terms of the pooled difference in LES pressure, Eckardt scores, and other factors (clinical success, length of total myotomy, hospital stays, GERD, adverse events, and procedure time) seemed to be similar for the anterior and posterior approaches. However, the further prognosis after POEM via anterior and posterior approaches needs to be answered in the future.

Single-dose versus short-course prophylactic antibiotics for peroral endoscopic myotomy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has been recommended for achalasia treatment. To prevent the potential of infective risk, antibiotic prophylaxis is usually administered, whereas the additional need of antibiotic therapy after POEM is uncertain. The primary endpoint was to determine whether prophylaxis versus prophylaxis plus short therapy was needed after POEM.

METHODS

Consecutive patients scheduled for POEM were randomly assigned (1:1) to group A (prophylactic cefazolin 2 g IV) or group B (prophylaxis + cefazolin 2 g IV × 3 followed by oral amoxicillin/clavulanate 3 g/day). Infective risk was assessed by means of host response, namely body temperature and serum levels of white blood cells and C-reactive protein; immune response (the cytokines interleukin [IL]-6, IL-1β, and tumor necrosis factor-α and microbial translocation mediators lipopolysaccharide binding protein and soluble CD14); and blood cultures at time points before (t0) and after (t1, t2) POEM.

RESULTS

After POEM, none of the 124 enrolled patients (54.6 ± 12.6 years old; 64 men) developed any fever (body temperature: t0, 36.56± .49°C; t1, 36.53± .52°C; t2, 36.48± .41°C), without any differences between groups at any time point. Regarding systemic inflammation, no difference was reported between groups in serum levels of C-reactive protein and white blood cells. Considering microbial translocation mediated response, lipopolysaccharide binding protein (group A: t0, 1539 ± 168.6 pg/mL; t1, 1321 ± 149.1 pg/mL; t2, 2492 ± 283.2 pg/mL; group B: t0, 1318 ± 115.9 pg/mL; t1, 1492 ± 163.8 pg/mL; t2, 2600 ± 328.2 pg/mL) and soluble CD14 (group A: t0, 2.16 ± .15 μg/mL; t1, 1.89 ± .15 μg/mL; t2, 2.2 ± .15 μg/mL; group B: t0, 2.1 ± .13 μg/mL; t1, 2 ± .13 μg/mL; t2, 2.5 ± .2 μg/mL) were similar between the 2 groups; the immune response cytokines IL-6, IL-1β, and tumor necrosis factor-α also were similar in the 2 groups. In relation to blood cultures, at t1 the group B bacteremia rate was 3.2% (2/62) and group A was 1.6% (1/62) with no difference (P = .6). All subsequent blood cultures were negative at t2.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our study, postprophylactic short-term antimicrobial therapy after POEM is not required because of a very low residual infective risk. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03587337.).

Gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) after peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM)

BACKGROUND

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is gaining traction as a minimally invasive treatment of achalasia. Increased reflux is reported after POEM but the incidence, type and severity of reflux are not fully understood. We aimed to study the prevalence and nature of reflux after POEM and correlate reflux with endoscopy and pH-impedance findings.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study of achalasia patients undergoing POEM since 2014. Data from Eckardt and GERD symptom scores, high-resolution oesophageal manometry (HRM) and gastroscopy were performed pre-procedure and repeated at 1-year follow-up. Data from 24-h pH-impedance, if performed, were also recorded. A standardized questionnaire was used to determine the severity and frequency of heartburn symptoms and the composite score for each patient was calculated.

RESULTS

58 patients underwent POEM between January 2014 and October 2018. The efficacy of POEM at 1 year was 93.0%. We observed reduction of median Integrated Relaxation Pressure (IRP) from 23.5 ± 33.1 mmHg to 13.4 ± 7.71 mmHg (p = 0.005) and mean Eckardt score improved from 6.09 ± 2.43 points to 1.16 ± 1.70 points (p < 0.001). At 1 year, 43.1% (n = 25) had symptomatic reflux. Of the 40 patients who underwent repeated gastroscopy, 60.0% (n = 24) had endoscopic evidence of oesophagitis with seven patients (18%) diagnosed with Grade C or D oesophagitis. 43.1% (n = 25) of patients had pH-impedance done post-POEM off PPIs. 14 patients (56%) had increased acid exposure. Sixteen percent of reflux episodes were acidic and 77.3% were weakly acidic.

CONCLUSION

POEM was an effective treatment for achalasia. However, GERD was common after POEM with incidence of 43% on symptom score, 60% on endoscopy and 56% on pH-impedance test. Post-POEM reflux appeared to be predominantly acidic in nature. Routine surveillance for GERD after POEM is recommended.

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) vs pneumatic dilation (PD) in treatment of achalasia: A meta-analysis of studies with ≥ 12-month follow-up

Background and study aims  Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is increasingly being used as the preferred treatment option for achalasia. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of POEM versus pneumatic balloon dilation (PD). Methods  We performed a comprehensive review of studies that reported clinical outcomes of POEM and PD for the treatment of achalasia. Measured outcomes included clinical success (improvement of symptoms based on a validated scale including an Eckardt score ≤ 3), adverse events, and post-treatment gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Results  Sixty-six studies (6268 patients) were included in the final analysis, of which 29 studies (2919 patients) reported on POEM and 33 studies (3050 patients) reported on PD and 4 studies (299 patients) compared POEM versus PD. Clinical success with POEM was superior to PD at 12, 24, and 36 months (92.9 %, vs 76.9 % P  = 0.001; 90.6 % vs 74.8 %, P  = 0.004; 88.4 % vs 72.2 %, P  = 0.006, respectively). POEM was superior to PD in type I, II and III achalasia (92.7 % vs 61 %, P  = 0.01; 92.3 % vs 80.3 %, P  = 0.01; 92.3 %v 41.9 %, P  = 0.01 respectively) Pooled OR of clinical success at 12 and 24 months were significantly higher with POEM (8.97; P  = 0.001 & 5.64; P  = 0.006). Pooled OR of GERD was significantly higher with POEM (by symptoms: 2.95, P  = 0.02 and by endoscopic findings: 6.98, P  = 0.001). Rates of esophageal perforation (0.3 % vs 0.6 %, P  = 0.8) and significant bleeding (0.4 % vs 0.7 %, P  = 0.56) were comparable between POEM and PD groups. Conclusions  POEM is more efficacious than PD in the treatment of patients with achalasia during short-term and long-term follow-up, albeit with higher risk of abnormal esophageal acid exposure.

Is peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) more effective than pneumatic dilation and Heller myotomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Achalasia is a rare, chronic, and morbid condition with evolving treatment. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has gained considerable popularity, but its comparative effectiveness is uncertain. We aim to evaluate the literature comparing POEM to Heller myotomy (HM) and pneumatic dilation (PD) for the treatment of achalasia.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of comparative studies between POEM and HM or PD. A priori outcomes pertained to efficacy, perioperative metrics, and safety. Internal validity of observational studies and randomized trials (RCTs) was judged using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool, respectively.

RESULTS

From 1379 unique literature citations, we included 28 studies comparing POEM and HM (n = 21) or PD (n = 8), with only 1 RCT addressing each. Aside from two 4-year observational studies, POEM follow-up averaged ≤ 2 years. While POEM had similar efficacy to HM, POEM treated dysphagia better than PD both in an RCT (treatment "success" RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.34-2.17; 126 patients) and in observational studies (Eckardt score MD - 0.43, 95% CI - 0.71 to - 0.16; 5 studies; I² 21%; 405 patients). POEM needed reintervention less than PD in an RCT (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.08-0.47; 126 patients) and HM in an observational study (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.16, 0.68; 98 patients). Though 6-12 months patient-reported reflux was worse than PD in 3 observational studies (RR 2.67, 95% CI 1.02-7.00; I² 0%; 164 patients), post-intervention reflux was inconsistently measured and not statistically different in measures ≥ 1 year. POEM had similar safety outcomes to both HM and PD, including treatment-related serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

POEM has similar outcomes to HM and greater efficacy than PD. Reflux remains a critical outcome with unknown long-term clinical significance due to insufficient data and inconsistent reporting.

2019 Seoul Consensus on Esophageal Achalasia Guidelines

Esophageal achalasia is a primary motility disorder characterized by insufficient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation and loss of esophageal peristalsis. Achalasia is a chronic disease that causes progressive irreversible loss of esophageal motor function. The recent development of high-resolution manometry has facilitated the diagnosis of achalasia, and determining the achalasia subtypes based on high-resolution manometry can be important when deciding on treatment methods. Peroral endoscopic myotomy is less invasive than surgery with comparable efficacy. The present guidelines (the "2019 Seoul Consensus on Esophageal Achalasia Guidelines") were developed based on evidence-based medicine; the Asian Neurogastroenterology and Motility Association and Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility served as the operating and development committees, respectively. The development of the guidelines began in June 2018, and a draft consensus based on the Delphi process was achieved in April 2019. The guidelines consist of 18 recommendations: 2 pertaining to the definition and epidemiology of achalasia, 6 pertaining to diagnoses, and 10 pertaining to treatments. The endoscopic treatment section is based on the latest evidence from meta-analyses. Clinicians (including gastroenterologists, upper gastrointestinal tract surgeons, general physicians, nurses, and other hospital workers) and patients could use these guidelines to make an informed decision on the management of achalasia.

Effects of Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy on Esophageal Function in the Treatment of Achalasia

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a new technique to treat achalasia, but the effects on esophageal motor function and structure are still unclear. This study aimed to examine the esophageal function and anatomical changes of patients with achalasia treated with POEM. This was a retrospective study of 43 patients with achalasia treated with POEM between January 2013 and January 2016 at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University. The patients were grouped as previous treatments for achalasia (n = 19) versus no previous treatment (n = 24). Surgical success (defined as Eckardt score ≤3 points or decreased by >3 points compared with baseline), recurrence, and reintervention were analyzed. Three patients (7.0%) were Eckardt grade I, 16 (37.2%) were grade II, and 24 (55.8%) were grade III. Operation time was 35 to 150 (median = 49) minutes. Both groups showed improvements in the Eckardt score after surgery (both P < .001), without a difference between the 2 groups (P = .749). The maximal mean diameter of the esophagus was reduced, and the lower esophageal sphincter pressure was improved after surgery (both groups, all P < .001), without difference between the 2 groups (all P > .05). One case of failure was probably due to the presence of an esophageal stent. POEM has a high success rate and is possibly unaffected by previous treatments, except maybe stent implantation. Clinical symptoms of achalasia are significantly relieved by POEM; the function of the esophageal sphincter and the esophagus structure are improved. Previous esophageal stent implantation could increase failure likelihood, but this will have to be confirmed.

PERORAL (POEM) OR SURGICAL MYOTOMY FOR THE TREATMENT OF ACHALASIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Achalasia is a neurodegenerative motility esophageal disorder characterized by failure of lower esophageal sphincter relaxation. The conventional treatment option for achalasia has been laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM). However, in 2010, Inoue et al. described peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), a minimally invasive procedure, as an alternative therapy. To date, some studies with small sample sizes have aimed to compare outcomes of LHM vs POEM. OBJECTIVE: Thus, the aim of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to better evaluate the efficacy and safety of these two techniques. METHODS: Individualized search strategies were developed from inception through April 2019 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Variables analyzed included operative time, overall adverse events rate, post-procedure gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), hospitalization length, post-procedure pain score, and Eckardt Score reduction. RESULTS: Twelve cohort trials were selected, consisting of 893 patients (359 in POEM group and 534 in LHM.) No randomized clinical trials were available. There was no difference in operative time (MD= -10,26, 95% CI (-5,6 to 8,2), P<0.001) or Post-Operative Gastroesophageal Reflux (RD: -0.00, 95%CI: (-0.09, 0.09), I2: 0%). There was decreased length of hospital stay for POEM (MD: -0.6, 95% CI (-1.11, -0.09), P=0.02), and an increased mean reduction in Eckardt score in POEM patients (MD = -0.257, 95% CI: (-0.512 to -0.002), P=0.048), with similar rates of adverse events. CONCLUSION: POEM demonstrated similar results compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy with regards to improvement of dysphagia, post-procedure reflux, and surgical time, with the benefit of shorter length of hospital stay. Therefore, POEM can be considered an option for patients with achalasia.

Comparative efficacy of per-oral endoscopic myotomy and Heller myotomy in patients with achalasia: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although both per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and Heller myotomy (HM) have been used for the treatment of achalasia, the comparative efficacy of POEM and HM has yet to be fully evaluated.

METHODS

We searched all relevant studies published up to September 2018 examining the comparative efficacy between POEM and HM. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analyses for Eckardt scores, perioperative outcomes, and reflux-related outcomes were performed based on a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies with a total of 1213 patients were evaluated. The follow-up duration ranged from 2 to 46.2 months and from 2 to 54.2 months in the POEM and HM groups, respectively. Postoperative Eckardt scores were lower (better) in the POEM group than in the HM group (pooled standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.03 to -0.13). Length of myotomy was greater in the POEM group than in the HM group (pooled SMD, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42-0.84). There was no difference in reflux symptoms and pathologic reflux on pH monitoring between the groups (pooled risk ratio [RR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.61-1.73; and pooled RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.67-2.25, respectively). Erosive esophagitis on endoscopy tended to be less common in the HM group (pooled RR, 1.88; 95% CI, 0.98-3.62).

CONCLUSION

Although long-term follow-up data are insufficient, the short-term efficacy of POEM was superior to that of HM. Erosive esophagitis tended to be more common in the POEM group; however, there was no difference in reflux symptoms and pathologic reflux on pH monitoring between the groups.

Per-oral endoscopic myotomy and gastroesophageal reflux: Where do we stand after a decade of "POETRY"?

Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) was introduced nearly a decade ago. Since then, the literature on its safety and efficacy has been ever increasing. Initial studies focused solely on the feasibility and efficacy of this procedure in patients with idiopathic achalasia. Subsequent studies analyzed the incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in addition to the efficacy of POEM. These studies depict a high incidence of GERD after POEM. However, vast majority of these studies lacked a comprehensive evaluation of GERD after POEM. Consequently, it is difficult to provide a true estimate of the incidence of GERD in these patients. Majority of the patients with post-POEM GERD are asymptomatic and those with symptoms usually respond well to proton pump inhibitors. However, the long-term consequences of asymptomatic GERD with increased esophageal acid exposure are not well known. These patients should probably undergo regular surveillance due to theoretical risks of complications like Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma. It should be acknowledged that there is no well-controlled study to support the strategy of surveillance in this group of patients. Given the high incidence of GERD after POEM, it is time to devise minimally invasive novel strategies to prevent and manage post-POEM GERD. The current literature suggests that the technique of POEM and other factors like type of achalasia do not influence the occurrence of GERD after POEM. Therefore, the endoscopists will need to think out of the box to prevent post-POEM GERD.

Outcome of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in treatment-naive patients. A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Achalasia is a primary motility disorder of the esophagus characterized by aperistalsis and failure of lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxation. Treatment of achalasia aims at reducing LES pressure. The common treatment modalities are laparoscopic Heller myotomy and pneumatic dilatation, but during the last decade, a promising treatment, per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), has been introduced. The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review of the literature to assess the outcome of POEM in treatment-naive patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed using the terms 'Achalasia AND (POEM OR peroral endoscopic myotomy OR per-oral endoscopic myotomy)'. Inclusion criteria were: original article; English language; n ≥ 20 with ≥90% treatment-naive patients; follow-up ≥3 months; and outcome evaluation of POEM including symptom score and objective tests. Exclusion criteria were: reviews and meta-analyses; pediatric data; duplicates; and articles with overlapping data material.

RESULTS

Of the 1641 articles identified, seven were included. The included studies all reported a short-term clinical success of >90%. Clinical success including post-POEM reflux was mainly estimated by symptom scorings. There were few procedure-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The studies of treatment-naive patients indicate a high rate of clinical success. Nevertheless, a more systematic and standardized evaluation is recommended to improve the reports on outcome of POEM. The follow-up rate should be high and the evaluation protocol should include both symptom scoring and objective testing with predefined treatment goals.

Management of achalasia cardia: Expert consensus statements

Achalasia cardia (AC) is a frequently encountered motility disorder of the esophagus resulting from an irreversible degeneration of neurons. Treatment modalities are palliative in nature, and there is no curative treatment available for AC as of now. Significant advancements have been made in the management of AC over last decade. The introduction of high resolution manometry and per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has strengthened the diagnostic and therapeutic armamentarium of AC. High resolution manometry allows for the characterization of the type of achalasia, which in turn has important therapeutic implications. The endoscopic management of AC has been reinforced with the introduction of POEM that has been found to be highly effective and safe in palliating the symptoms in short-term to mid-term follow-up studies. POEM is less invasive than Heller's myotomy and provides the endoscopist with the opportunity of adjusting the length and orientation of esophageal myotomy according to the type of AC. The management of achalasia needs to be tailored for each patient, and the role of pneumatic balloon dilatation, POEM, or Heller's myotomy needs to be revisited. In this review, we discuss the important aspects of diagnosis as well as management of AC. The statements presented in the manuscript reflect the cumulative efforts of an expert consensus group.