Short-term Outcome of Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy Performed by the Same Endoscopist on Achalasia and Nonachalasia Esophageal Motility Disorders

BACKGROUND

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a relatively new but increasingly therapeutic option for achalasia. In recent years, POEM has been used for nonachalasia esophageal motility disorders (NAEMDs), such as diffuse esophageal spasm, esophagogastric junction outlet obstruction, and hypercontractile disorder, with some clinical success. No studies thus far compare the outcomes of these two groups. We perform the first head-to-head comparison of outcomes after POEM in patients with achalasia and NAEMD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing POEM at one university hospital by a single expert endoscopist from July 2021 to December 2022 was performed. All patients were symptomatic, and the presence of esophageal motility disorders was confirmed using multiple diagnostic modalities. These patients were then divided into 2 groups, achalasia and NAEMD, based on the underlying diagnosis. Statistical analysis of different clinical outcomes, including effectiveness and safety, was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients (mean age: 59.55, females: 22) underwent POEM in the study period. Twenty patients had achalasia and 17 patients had NAEMD. The median myotomy length was 5.5 cm for the achalasia group and 10 cm for the NAEMD group. This excluded patients with esophagogastric junction outlet obstruction in which the median myotomy length was 3 cm. The procedure time, the duration of hospital stays, the rates of same-day discharge, and complications were similar between the two. Short-term outcomes of POEM for the two groups were similar with improvement in 94% of patients in the achalasia group and 93.75% in the NAEMD group.

CONCLUSION

Contrary to prior observations, our study highlights that POEM is equally effective in achieving clinical improvement in patients with NAEMD as achalasia over 6 months of follow-up. In addition, POEM has a comparable safety profile in both patient groups making it a feasible therapeutic option for these debilitating and challenging disorders.

Electronic Health Record Recording of Patient Pain: Challenges and Discrepancies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the present review, various categories of pain, clinician-observed pain scales, and patient-reported pain scales are evaluated to better understand factors that impact patient pain perceptions. Additionally, the expansion of areas that require further research to determine the optimal way to evaluate pain scale data for treatment and management are discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Electronic health record (EHR) data provides a starting point for evaluating whether patient predictors influence postoperative pain. There are several ways to assess pain and choosing the most effective form of pain treatment. Identifying individuals at high risk for severe postoperative pain enables more effective pain treatment. However, there are discrepancies in patient pain reporting dependent on instruments used to measure pain and their storage in the EHR. Additionally, whether administered by a physician or another healthcare practitioner, differences in patient pain perception occur. While each scale has distinct advantages and limitations, pain scale data is a valuable therapeutic tool for assisting clinicians in providing patients with optimal pain control. Accurate assessment of patient pain perceptions by data extraction from electronic health records provides a potential for pain alleviation improvement. Predicting high-risk postoperative pain syndromes is a difficult clinical challenge. Numerous studies have been conducted on factors that impact pain prediction. Postoperative pain is significantly predicted by the kind of operation, the existence of prior discomfort, patient anxiety, and age.