A cost-minimization analysis of alternative treatment strategies for achalasia

Endoscopic Pneumatic Dilation for Esophageal Achalasia

Pneumatic dilation is a well-established treatment modality that has withstood the test of time. Prospective and randomized trials have shown that in expert hands, it provides results similar to a laparoscopic Heller myotomy with fundoplication. In addition, it should be considered the primary form of treatment in patients who experience recurrence of symptoms after a surgical myotomy.

Economic evaluation of the randomized European Achalasia trial comparing pneumodilation with Laparoscopic Heller myotomy

BACKGROUND

A recent multicenter randomized trial in achalasia patients has shown that pneumatic dilation resulted in equivalent relief of symptoms compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy. Additionally, the cost of each treatment should be also taken in consideration. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to perform an economic analysis of the European achalasia trial.

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed achalasia were enrolled from to 2003 to 2008 in 14 centers in five European countries and were randomly assigned to either pneumatic dilation (PD) or laparoscopic Heller (LHM). The economic analysis was performed in the three centers in three different countries where most patients were enrolled (Amsterdam [NL], Leuven, [B] and Padova [I]) and then applied to all patients included in the study. The total raw costs of the two treatments per patient include the initial costs, the costs of complications, and the costs of retreatments.

RESULTS

Two hundred and one patients, 107 (57 males and 50 females, mean age 46 CI: 43-49 years) were randomized to LHM and 94 (59 males and 34 females, mean age 46 CI 43-50 years) to PD. The total cost of PD per patient was quite comparable in the three different centers; €3397 in Padova, €3259 in Amsterdam and €3792 in Leuven. For LHM, the total costs per patient were highest in Amsterdam: €4488 in Padova, €6720 in Amsterdam, and €5856 in Leuven.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the strategy of treating achalasia starting with PD appears the most economic approach, independent of the health system.

POEM is a cost-effective procedure: cost-utility analysis of endoscopic and surgical treatment options in the management of achalasia

BACKGROUND

Achalasia is a rare motility disorder of the esophagus. Treatment is palliative with the goal of symptom remission and slowing the progression of the disease. Treatment options include per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LM) and endoscopic treatments such as pneumatic dilation (PD) and botulinum toxin type A injections (BI). We evaluate the economics and cost-effectiveness of treating achalasia.

METHODS

We performed cost analysis for POEM, LM, PD and BI at our institution from 2011 to 2015. Cost of LM was set to 1, and other procedures are presented as percentage change. Cost-effectiveness was calculated based on cost, number of interventions required for optimal results for dilations and injections and efficacy reported in the current literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated by a cost-utility analysis using quality-adjusted life year gained, defined as a symptom-free year in a patient with achalasia.

RESULTS

Average number of interventions required was 2.3 dilations or two injections for efficacies of 80 and 61 %, respectively. POEM cost 1.058 times the cost of LM, and PD and BI cost 0.559 and 0.448 times the cost of LM. Annual cost per cure over a period of 4 years for POEM, and LM were consistently equivalent, trending the same as PD although this has a lower initial cost. The cost per cure of BI remains stable over 3 years and then doubles.

CONCLUSION

The cost-effectiveness of POEM and LM is equivalent. Myotomy, either surgical or endoscopic, is more cost-effective than BI due to high failure rates of the economical intervention. When treatment is being considered BI should be utilized in patients with less than 2-year life expectancy. Pneumatic dilations are cost-effective and are an acceptable approach to treatment of achalasia, although myotomy has a lower relapse rate and is cost-effective compared to PD after 2 years.

Endoscopic pneumatic dilation versus botulinum toxin injection in the management of primary achalasia

BACKGROUND

Achalasia is an oesophageal motility disorder, of unknown cause, which results in increased lower oesophageal sphincter (LOS) tone and symptoms of difficulty swallowing. Treatments are aimed at reducing the LOS tone. Current endoscopic therapeutic options include pneumatic dilation (PD) or botulinum toxin (BTX) injection.

OBJECTIVES

To undertake a systematic review comparing the efficacy and safety of two endoscopic treatments, PD and intrasphincteric BTX injection, in the treatment of oesophageal achalasia.

SEARCH METHODS

Trials were initially identified by searching MEDLINE (1966 to August 2008), EMBASE (1980 to September 2008), ISI Web of Science (1955 to September 2008), The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2008.  Searches in all databases were conducted in October 2005 and updated in September 2008 and April 2014. The Cochrane highly sensitive search strategy for identifying randomised trials in MEDLINE, sensitivity maximising version in the Ovid format, was combined with specific search terms to identify randomised controlled trials in MEDLINE. The MEDLINE search strategy was adapted for use in the other databases that were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing PD to BTX injection in individuals with primary achalasia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study quality assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies involving 178 participants were included. Two studies were excluded from the meta-analysis of remission rates on the basis of clinical heterogeneity of the initial endoscopic protocols. There was no significant difference between PD or BTX treatment in remission within four weeks of the initial intervention; with a risk ratio of remission of 1.11 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.27). There was also no significant difference in the mean oesophageal pressures between the treatment groups; with a weighted mean difference for PD of -0.77 (95% CI -2.44 to 0.91, P = 0.37). Data on remission rates following the initial endoscopic treatment were available for three studies at six months and four studies at 12 months. At six months 46 of 57 PD participants were in remission compared to 29 of 56 in the BTX group, giving a risk ratio of 1.57 (95% CI 1.19 to 2.08, P = 0.0015); whilst at 12 months 55 of 75 PD participants were in remission compared to 27 of 72 BTX participants, with a risk ratio of 1.88 (95% CI 1.35 to 2.61, P = 0.0002). No serious adverse outcomes occurred in participants receiving BTX, whilst PD was complicated by perforation in three cases.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that PD is the more effective endoscopic treatment in the long term (greater than six months) for patients with achalasia.

Advances in the treatment of achalasia

OPINION STATEMENT

Achalasia, although rare, remains one of the most commonly diagnosed disorders of esophageal motility. It results from an idiopathic loss of ganglion cells responsible for esophageal motility and relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). As a result, patients present with worsening dysphagia to both liquids and solids and often suffer from significant regurgitation of retained food in the esophagus. When the diagnosis of achalasia is suspected, patients should undergo evaluation with esophageal motility testing, endoscopic examination, and contrast esophagram. Once the diagnosis of achalasia has been established, options for treatment rely on controlling patient symptoms. Medical options are available, but their effectiveness is inconsistent. Endoscopic options include injection of botulinum toxin, which can achieve good short-term results, and pneumatic balloon dilation (PBD), considered the most effective non-surgical option. Surgical options, including laparoscopic, open, or endoscopic myotomy, and provide long-lasting results. This chapter will review achalasia and the treatment options available.

ACG clinical guideline: diagnosis and management of achalasia

Achalasia is a primary motor disorder of the esophagus characterized by insufficient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation and loss of esophageal peristalsis. This results in patients' complaints of dysphagia to solids and liquids, regurgitation, and occasional chest pain with or without weight loss. Endoscopic finding of retained saliva with puckered gastroesophageal junction or barium swallow showing dilated esophagus with birds beaking in a symptomatic patient should prompt appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. In this ACG guideline the authors present an evidence-based approach in patients with achalasia based on a comprehensive review of the pertinent evidence and examination of relevant published data.

Achalasia

Achalasia is the best understood and most readily treatable esophageal motility disorder. It serves as a prototype for disorders of the enteric nervous system with degeneration of the myenteric neurons that innervate the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and esophageal body. Investigations into the pathogenesis have highlighted the importance of nitric oxide and the possible role of an autoimmune response to a viral insult in genetically susceptible individuals. Advances in diagnostic testing have delineated manometric variants of achalasia that have implications for management. Treatment studies have demonstrated the limited efficacy of botulinum toxin as well as less than ideal, long-term effectiveness of both pneumatic dilation and Heller myotomy. This article incorporates these recent developments into the current understanding of achalasia.

Trends of Heller myotomy hospitalizations for achalasia in the United States, 1993-2005: effect of surgery volume on perioperative outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Achalasia is a rare chronic disorder of esophageal motor function. Single-center reports suggest that there has been greater use of laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia in the United States since its introduction in 1992. We aimed to study the trends of Heller myotomy and the relationship between surgery volume and perioperative outcomes.

DATA AND METHODS

The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) is a 20% stratified sample of all hospitalizations in the United States. It was used to study the macro-trends of Heller myotomy hospitalizations during 1993-2005. We also used the NIS 2003-2005 micro-data to study the perioperative outcomes of Heller myotomy hospitalizations, using other achalasia and laparoscopic cholecystectomy hospitalizations as control groups. The generalized linear model with repeated observations from the same unit was used to adjust for multiple hospitalizations from the same hospital.

RESULTS

The national estimate of Heller myotomy hospitalizations increased from 728 to 2,255 during 1993-2005, while its mean length of stay decreased from 9.9 to 4.3 days. Of the 1,117 Heller myotomy hospitalizations in the NIS 2003-2005, 10 (0.9%) had the diagnosis of esophageal perforation at discharge. Length of stay was negatively correlated with a hospital's number of Heller myotomy per year (correlation coefficient -0.171, P < 0.001). In multivariate log-linear regressions with a control group, a hospital's number of Heller myotomy per year was negatively associated with length of stay (coefficient -0.215 to -0.119, both P < 0.001) and total charges (coefficient -0.252 to -0.073, both P < 0.10). These findings were robust in alternative statistical models, specifications, and subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

On a national level, the introduction of laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia was associated with greater use of surgery and shorter length of stay. A larger volume of Heller myotomy in a hospital was associated with better perioperative outcomes in terms of shorter length of stay and lower total charges.

[Surgical management of primary esophageal motility disorders]

Primary esophageal motility disorders are rare, the most common diagnoses being achalasia and diffuse esophageal spasm. Treatment aims to alleviate symptoms and may be medical, endoscopic, or surgical. Achalasia is most commonly treated by pneumatic dilatation or by laparoscopic Heller cardiomyotomy. Pneumatic dilatation is effective in 60-80% of cases, but functional results deteriorate over time. Surgical treatment is indicated when endoscopic dilatation is contraindicated or has failed. Functional results after cardiomyotomy are satisfactory in 90% of cases and results appear to be stable over time. The need for an associated antireflux procedure and the type of fundoplication remain controversial. For diffuse esophageal spasm, extended esophageal myotomy has yielded satisfactory functional results, but surgical treatment should be reserved for selected patients with severe symptoms.

Update on the management of achalasia: balloons, surgery and drugs

Achalasia cannot be cured. Instead, our goal is to relieve symptoms of dysphagia and regurgitation, improve esophageal emptying and prevent the development of megaesophagus. The most definitive therapies are pneumatic dilation and surgical myotomy. The overall success of grade pneumatic dilation is 78%, with women and older patients performing best. Laparoscopic myotomy has an overall success rate of 85%, but can be complicated by the sequelae of severe acid reflux disease. Young patients, especially men, are the best candidates for surgical myotomy. There are no prospective, randomized studies comparing these two procedures. Botulinum toxin injections into the esophagus and smooth muscle relaxants are reserved for older patients or those with major comorbid illnesses. Some patients with end-stage achalasia will require esophagectomy.

Health economic evaluation of therapeutic strategies in patients with idiopathic achalasia: results of a randomized trial comparing pneumatic dilatation with laparoscopic cardiomyotomy

BACKGROUND

We have prospectively collected information concerning the costs incurred during the management of patients allocated to either forceful dilatation or to an immediate laparoscopic operation because of newly diagnosed achalasia.

METHODS

Fifty-one patients with newly diagnosed achalasia were randomized to either pneumatic dilatation to a diameter of 30-40 mm or to a laparoscopic myotomy to which was added a posterior partial fundoplication. Follow-ups were scheduled at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after inclusion. At each follow-up visit a study nurse interviewed the patients regarding symptoms and their quality of life (QoL) and a health economic questionnaire was completed. In the latter questionnaire, patients were asked to report the presence and character of contacts with the healthcare system since the last visit.

RESULTS

In the dilatation group six patients (23%), including the patient who was operated on because of perforation, were classified as failures during the first 12 months of follow-up compared to one (4%) in the myotomy group (p = 0.047). Five of those classified as failures in the dilatation group subsequently had a surgical myotomy and the sixth patient was treated with repeated dilatations. The patient classified as failure in the myotomy group was treated with endoscopic dilatation. The initial treatment cost and the total costs were significantly higher for laparoscopic myotomy compared to a pneumatic dilatation-based strategy (p = 0.0002 and p = 0.0019, respectively). When the total costs were subdivided into the different resources used, we found that the single largest cost item for pneumatic dilatation was that for hospital stay and that for laparoscopic myotomy was the actual operative treatment (operating room time). The cost-effectiveness analysis, relating to the actual treatment failures, revealed that the cost to avoid one treatment failure (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) amounted to 9239 euros.

CONCLUSION

The current prospective, controlled clinical trial shows that despite a higher level of clinical efficacy of laparoscopic myotomy to prevent treatment failure in newly diagnosed achalasia, the cost effectiveness of pneumatic dilatation is superior, at least when a reasonable time horizon is applied.

The cost of laparoscopic myotomy versus pneumatic dilatation for esophageal achalasia

BACKGROUND

The two main treatment options for esophageal achalasia are laparoscopic distal esophageal myotomy (LM) and pneumatic dilatation (PD). Our objective was to compare the costs of these management strategies.

METHODS

We constructed a decision analytic model consisting of two treatment strategies for patients diagnosed with achalasia. Probabilities of events were systematically derived from a literature review, supplemented by expert opinion when necessary. Costs were estimated from the perspective of a third-party payer and society, including both direct and indirect costs. Future costs were discounted at a rate of 5.5% over a time horizon of 5 and 10 years. Uncertainty in the probability estimates was incorporated using probabilistic sensitivity analyses. We tested uncertainty in the model by modifying key assumptions and repeating the analysis.

RESULTS

From the societal perspective, the expected cost per patient was $10,789 (LM) compared with $5,315 (PD) five years following diagnosis, and $11,804 (LM) compared with $7,717 (PD) after 10 years. The 95% confidence interval of the incremental cost per patient treated with LM was ($5,280, $5,668) after five years, and ($3,863, $4,311) after 10 years. The incremental cost of LM was similar from the third-party payer perspective and in the secondary model analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial LM is a more costly management strategy under all clinically plausible scenarios tested in this model. Further research is needed to determine patients' preferences for the two treatment modalities, and society's willingness to bear the incremental cost of LM for those who choose it.

Endoscopic pneumatic dilation versus botulinum toxin injection in the management of primary achalasia

BACKGROUND

Achalasia is an oesophageal motility disorder, of unknown cause, which results in increased lower oesophageal sphincter (LOS) tone and symptoms of difficulty swallowing. Treatments are aimed at reducing the LOS tone. Current endoscopic therapeutic options include pneumatic dilation (PD) or botulinum toxin injection (BTX).

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to compare the efficacy and safety of two endoscopic treatments, pneumatic dilatation and intrasphincteric botulinum toxin injection, in the treatment of oesophageal achalasia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Group trials register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (1966 to Oct 2005), EMBASE (1980 to Oct 2005), BIOSIS (1969 to Oct 2005) and Web of Science (1955 to October 2005). We also searched abstracts from significant Gastroenterology meetings (DDW, UEGW) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing PD to BTX injection in patients with primary achalasia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed quality assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies involving 178 participants were included. Two studies were excluded from the meta-analysis of remission rates on the basis of clinical heterogeneity of the initial endoscopic protocols. There was no significant difference in remission between PD or BTX treatment within four weeks of the initial intervention, with a relative risk of remission of 1.15 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.38, P = 0.39) for PD compared to BTX. There was also no significant difference in the mean oesophageal pressures between the treatment groups; weighted mean difference for PD of -0.77 (95% CI -2.44 to 0.91, P = 0.37). Data on remission rates following the initial endoscopic treatment was available for two studies at six months and three studies at 12 months. At six months 22 of 29 PD participants were in remission compared to 7 of 27 in the BTX group, giving a relative risk of 2.90 (95% CI 1.48 to 5.67, P = 0.002); whilst at 12 months 33 of 47 PD participants were in remission compared to 11 of 43 BTX participants, relative risk of 2.67 (95% CI 1.58 to 4.52, P = 0.0002). No serious adverse outcomes occurred in participants receiving BTX, whilst PD was complicated by perforation in three cases.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis would suggest that PD is the more effective endoscopic treatment in the long term (greater than six months) for patients with achalasia.

Review article: the management of achalasia - a comparison of different treatment modalities

BACKGROUND

Achalasia is an uncommon primary oesophageal motor disorder with an unknown aetiology. Therapeutic options for achalasia are aimed at decreasing the lower oesophageal sphincter pressure, improving the oesophageal empting, and most importantly, relieving the symptoms of achalasia. Modalities for treatment include pharmacologic, endoscopic, pneumatic dilatation and surgical. The decision of which modality to use involves the consideration of multiple clinical and economic factors.

AIM

To review the management strategies currently available for achalasia.

METHODS

A Medline search identified the original articles and reviews the published in the English language literature between 1966 and 2006.

RESULTS

The results reveal that pharmacotherapy, injection of botulinum toxin, pneumatic dilatation and minimally invasive surgical oesophagomyotomy are variably effective at controlling the symptoms of achalasia but that each modality has specific strengths and weaknesses which make them each suitable in certain populations. Overall, pharmacologic therapy results in the shortest lived, least durable response followed by botulinum toxin injection, pneumatic dilatation and surgery, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The optimal treatment for achalasia remains an area of controversy given our lack of complete understanding about the pathophysiology of the disease as well as the high numbers of clinical relapse after treatment. Further research focusing on optimal dosing of botulinum toxin injection and optimal timing of repeated graduated pneumatic dilatations could add to our knowledge regarding long-term therapy.

Modern management of achalasia

The goals in the treatment of achalasia are threefold: 1) relieving the symptoms, particularly dysphagia and bland regurgitation; 2) improving esophageal emptying by disrupting the poorly relaxing lower esophageal sphincter (LES); and 3) preventing the development of megaesophagus. Although achalasia cannot be permanently cured, excellent palliation is available in over 90% of patients, especially those with pneumatic dilation and laparoscopic Heller myotomy. The efficacy for short- and long-term therapy seems to be similar when performed by experts. Pneumatic dilation done as an outpatient surgery disrupts the LES muscle from within by using balloons of progressively larger diameter (3.0, 3.5, and 4.0 cm). Repeat dilations may be required; secondary severe gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is rare, but approximately 2% of patients will have an esophageal perforation. A surgical Heller myotomy is now being done laparoscopically through the abdomen that cuts the LES and extends the myotomy 2 to 3 cm onto the stomach. Usually 2 days of hospitalization is required, and patients can normally return to work in 1 to 2 weeks. Severe GERD with esophagitis and peptic stricture is a common complication; therefore, most surgeons combine the myotomy with an incomplete fundoplication. Medical therapy is much less effective than these invasive procedures. Smooth muscle relaxants (nitrates and calcium channel blockers) taken immediately before meals improve dysphagia, but side effects and drug tolerance are common. The injection of botulinum toxin (100 to 200 units) endoscopically into the LES gives short-term relief of symptoms and improves esophageal emptying. This treatment is most effective in the elderly, as symptom relief can last up to 1 to 2 years with a single injection. Several studies suggest the most cost-effective management of achalasia is initial treatment with pneumatic dilation.

Functional results after laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia: A comparative study to open surgery

BACKGROUND

Prospective studies comparing laparoscopic to open Heller myotomy for esophageal achalasia are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare functional outcome after laparoscopic and open Heller myotomy for esophageal achalasia.

METHODS

Eighty-two patients who underwent Heller-Dor myotomy for achalasia, via laparoscopy (n=52) or open surgery (n=30) were recorded prospectively (1993-2002). Median follow-up was 51 (12-111) months. Perioperative functional data were assessed via dysphagia and overall clinical (dysphagia, chest pain, regurgitation, gastroesophageal reflux) scores.

RESULTS

In laparoscopy patients, the operative time was longer (145 [95-290] vs 120 [70-230] minutes, P <.0001); the postoperative hospital stay and feeding resumption time was shorter (4 [2-25] vs 7.5 [5-18] days, P <.0001 and 2 [1-15] vs 4 [1-14] days, P <.0001). Three mucosal tears necessitated conversion to open surgery (6%). The rates of " excellent" or " satisfactory" results after laparoscopic and open surgery were 92% (n=48/52) versus 93% (n=28/30), and 83% (n=43/52) versus 83% (n=25/30) on overall clinical score. In both groups, the overall clinical score indicated significant improvement during 12-month follow-up. The laparoscopy and open surgery symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux rates were 10% and 7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic Heller myotomy favorably compares with open surgery regarding dysphagia relief and gastroesophageal reflux rate. Overall clinical score indicates gradual improvement in patient functional status during 12-month follow-up.

Pneumatic dilatation in achalasia of the esophagus: a report from Argentina

We review the treatment of esophageal achalasia by means of pneumatic dilatation (PD), analyzing its results and comparing them with those of the literature. We conclude that our personal experience is similar to that of the literature: PD and surgery produce similar results (67-95%), morbidity (2-9.5%), and mortality (0.7-1%); and PD is cheaper than surgery. According to these conclusions, we believe that the decision of the appropriate treatment should be based on a combination of the choice of the properly informed patient and the operator's experience. However, we also conclude that surgery is mandatory in selected cases, such as achalasia associated with hiatus hernia, esophageal diverticula and neoplasia, history of previous PD failure (since in our experience the results after a second PD are very poor), postoperative relapse, and patients with grade IV mega-esophagus according to Resano-Malenchini's classification.

Botulinum toxin injection versus laparoscopic myotomy for the treatment of esophageal achalasia: economic analysis of a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The treatment of esophageal achalasia is still controversial: current therapies are palliative and aim to relieve dysphagia by disrupting or relaxing the lower esophageal sphincter muscle fibers with botulinum toxin. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and economic results of two such treatments: laparoscopic myotomy and botulinum toxin injection.

METHODS

A total of 37 patients with esophageal achalasia were randomly assigned to receive laparoscopic myotomy (20) or two Botox injections 1 month apart (17). All patients were treated at the same hospital and were part of a larger multicenter study. Symptom score, lower esophageal sphincter pressure, and esophageal diameter at barium swallow were compared. The economic analysis was performed considering only the direct costs (cost per treatment and cost effectiveness, i.e., cost per patient healed).

RESULTS

Mortality and morbidity were nil in both groups. The actuarial probability of being asymptomatic at 2 years was 90% for surgery and 34% for Botox (p < 0.05). The initial cost was lower for Botox (1,245 Euros) than for surgery (3,555 Euros), but when cost effectiveness at 2 years was considered, this difference nearly disappeared: Botox 3,364 Euros, surgery 3,950 Euros.

CONCLUSION

Botox is still the least costly treatment, but the minimal difference in the longer term does not justify its use, given that surgery is a risk-free, definitive treatment.

Review article: botulinum toxin in the therapy of gastrointestinal motility disorders

Since 1980, botulinum toxin has been employed for the treatment of various voluntary muscle spastic disorders in the fields of neurology and ophthalmology. More recently, botulinum toxin has been proved to be effective in the therapy of dyskinetic smooth muscle disorders of the gastrointestinal tract. Achalasia and anal fissure are the gastrointestinal disorders in which botulinum toxin therapy has been most extensively investigated. Botulinum toxin is the best treatment option for achalasia in patients whose condition makes them unfit for pneumatic dilation or surgery. In anal fissure, botulinum toxin is highly effective and may become the treatment of choice. In the future, botulinum toxin application in the gastrointestinal tract will be extended to many other gastrointestinal disorders, such as non-achalasic motor disorders of the oesophagus, dysfunction of Oddi's sphincter, achalasia of the internal anal sphincter and others. This article describes the mechanism of action, rationale of employment, indications and side-effects of botulinum toxin application in smooth muscle disorders of the gastrointestinal tract, and compares the results of different techniques of botulinum toxin therapeutic application.

Preoperative intervention does not affect esophageal muscle histology or patient outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic Heller myotomy

Botox injection and pneumatic dilation are common therapies for achalasia. We sought to determine the impact of these preoperative therapies on esophageal muscle histology and outcomes after laparoscopic Heller myotomy. A total of 73 consecutive patients had esophageal muscle biopsies taken from the gastroesophageal junction at the time of myotomy between November 1998 and November 2001. Muscle fibrosis was graded by a senior pathologist who was blinded to preoperative treatments and postoperative outcomes. Patients graded their dysphagia and heartburn symptoms before and after myotomy and graded their outcomes at follow-up. Patients were grouped according to the preoperative endoscopic treatment (dilation, Botox, both, or neither) and the groups were compared. Preoperative therapy did not correlate with esophageal fibrosis or postoperative outcomes, and the degree of esophageal muscle fibrosis was not predictive of outcome. Symptom scores improved significantly for dysphagia (4.5 +/- 0.9 vs. 1.6 +/- 1.6) and heartburn (2.3 +/- 1.8 vs. 1.5 +/- 1.4) irrespective of preoperative therapy or fibrosis. Overall, excellent or good outcomes were obtained in 92% of patients at follow-up of 15.7 months +/- 14.4. Successful outcomes are highly probable after laparoscopic Heller myotomy regardless of preoperative interventions. The amount of fibrosis in the esophageal muscle is not related to preoperative intervention and is not predictive of outcomes.

Videoscopic Heller Myotomy as First-Line Therapy for Severe Achalasia

To many nonsurgeons myotomy is considered an excessively invasive treatment for achalasia and has become a salvage procedure when esophageal dilation and botulinum toxin (botox) injections fail. We sought to examine our experience with videoscopic Heller myotomy to determine whether preoperative therapy predicts perioperative complications and long-term outcome. Videoscopic Heller myotomy was undertaken in 111 patients with achalasia between June 1992 and May 2000. Intraoperative endoscopy was used in all patients. Fundoplication was used selectively for patients with large hiatal hernias or as part of repair of esophageal perforation. Patients were asked to grade their dysphagia and reflux symptoms before and after myotomy on a scale of 0 (no symptoms) to 5 (severe symptoms). Patients were also asked to rate their outcome as excellent (no symptoms), good (greatly improved), fair (slightly improved), or poor (not improved) compared with their preoperative status. Patients were stratified on the basis of preoperative intervention (botox, pneumatic dilation, botox and pneumatic dilation, or no botox or dilation) and compared. Previous pneumatic dilation and/or botox injection had been undertaken before operation in 88 (79%) patients whereas 23 (21%) patients had no invasive preoperative therapy. The overall mean preoperative dysphagia score was 4.8 ± 0.8 and mean preoperative reflux score was 3.3 ± 2.1. Groups of patients undergoing preoperative interventions were similar to those patients not undergoing preoperative interventions in terms of preoperative symptoms, dysphagia scores, and reflux scores. Postoperative complications (13%) and perforations (8%) were slightly more common in patients who had undergone preoperative botox or dilation ( P = not significant). Subjectively, operative myotomy was more difficult in patients who had preoperative botox or dilation. Patients had significant improvement in dysphagia, dysphagia score, reflux score, emesis/regurgitation, and chest pain ( P < 0.05) regardless of preoperative intervention. After myotomy patients who had never undergone botox or pneumatic dilation were less likely to have mild dysphagia compared with those with previous botox injections (30% vs 53%; P = 0.09), previous dilations (30% vs 54%; P = 0.09), or both (30% vs 59%; P = 0.04). As well, dysphagia scores were better if no preoperative therapy had been undertaken: botox 0.8 ± 1.3, dilation 1.0 ± 1.4, botex and dilation 1.0 ± 1.3, and no therapy 0.3 ± 0.7 ( P < 0.05). Overall 97 per cent of patients stated that their symptoms were improved although more patients tended to have excellent or good outcomes if no preoperative intervention was undertaken (91%) compared with patients undergoing preoperative botox (86%), dilation (83%), or both (82%) ( P = not significant). We conclude that videoscopic Heller myotomy is safe and efficacious particularly in patients who have not undergone previous endoscopic interventions. The difference in patients’ outcomes based on preoperative therapy may be related to a less difficult operation in patients who forgo endoscopic therapy and elect to undergo early myotomy. Although videoscopic Heller myotomy provides good outcomes as a salvage procedure after failed dilations and/or botox injections for achalasia we advocate it as first-line therapy in reasonable operative candidates.

Achalasia

The optimal treatment of achalasia includes several options and presents a challenge for most gastroenterologists. There are numerous patient variables that must be assessed including age, degree of symptoms, duration of disease, desires of each patient, and related comorbidities. Treatment includes both medical and surgical options, with medical therapy further subclassified into pharmacologic and pneumatic dilation. Pneumatic dilations with a polyethylene dilator (sizes of 3.0, 3.5, and 4.0 cm) and laparoscopic myotomy represent the most common forms of therapy. A graduated increase in dilator size, based on symptomatic response, minimizes complications and is successful in more than 90% of patients. Further dilations or adjustment of pharmacologic therapy should be based on symptoms, weight gain, and a timed barium meal. Referral for myotomy should be considered for patients who do not respond to medical therapy or individuals that do not desire pneumatic dilations. Most patients responding to botulinum toxin (Botox; Allergan, Irvine, CA) injections will require repeat treatment at 3- to 6-month intervals. Due to cost constraints, Botox therapy should be reserved for patients who are at an increased risk from possible complications of a dilation or surgery, or those with less than 2 years of life expectancy. The most cost-effective course of therapy per patient cured over a 5-year period is pneumatic dilation, then Botox, and finally laparoscopic myotomy.