A prospective multicentre study of per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia in Australia.
Endoscopy
Esophageal diseases
Journal
The Medical journal of Australia
ISSN: 1326-5377
Titre abrégé: Med J Aust
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 0400714
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2021
03 2021
Historique:
received:
22
12
2019
accepted:
09
10
2020
pubmed:
22
2
2021
medline:
12
3
2021
entrez:
21
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To describe the clinical and procedural outcomes of per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia in Australia. Prospective observational study in three Australian tertiary referral centres, 5 May 2014 - 27 October 2019 (66 months). Patients who had undergone POEM for achalasia. Eckardt scores calculated prior to POEM and six months, one year, and two years after POEM. The primary outcome was clinical success, defined as an Eckardt score of 3 or less without a second intervention. 142 patients underwent POEM for achalasia; their mean age was 52 years (SD, 18 years), 83 were men (58%), and the median length of hospital stay two days (IQR, 1-3 days). Their mean Eckardt score before POEM was 8.0 (SD, 2.4) and 1.1 (SD, 1.6) six months after POEM; it did not change significantly between six months and two years after POEM (mean monthly increase, 0.014 points; 95% CI, -0.001 to 0.029). A total of 127 patients (89%) improved clinically after POEM. Intra-procedural capnoperitoneum was the only risk factor associated with treatment failure (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.08-7.51). Previous treatments - botulinum toxin injection (25 patients, 18%), endoscopic balloon dilatation (69, 49%), and Heller myotomy (14, 10%) - did not affect POEM outcomes. Five patients (4%) experienced major adverse events, including pneumonia, oesophageal leak, empyema and melaena, that were managed during admission and without sequelae. POEM is an effective treatment for achalasia. Significant reductions in Eckardt scores achieved by six months are sustained at two years. POEM can be both a first line definitive therapy and a salvage therapy for patients not helped by other treatments.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
173-178Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2021 AMPCo Pty Ltd.
Références
Sadowski D, Ackah F, Jiang B, Svenson LW. Achalasia: incidence, prevalence and survival. A population-based study. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2010; 22: 256-261.
Samo S, Carlson DA, Gregory DL, et al. Incidence and prevalence of achalasia in Central Chicago, 2004-2014, since the widespread use of high-resolution manometry. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 15: 366-373.
Kahrilas P, Bredenoord A, Fox M, et al; International High Resolution Manometry Working Group. The Chicago Classification of esophageal motility disorders, v3.0. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2015; 27: 160-174.
Boeckxstaens GE. The lower oesophageal sphincter. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2005; 17: 13-21.
Boeckxstaens GE, Zaninotto G, Richter JE. Achalasia. Lancet 2014; 383: 83-93.
Eckardt VF. Clinical presentation and complications of achalasia. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2001; 11: 281-292.
Eckardt VF, Aignherr C, Bernhard G. Predictors of outcome in patients with achalasia treated by pneumatic dilation. Gastroenterology 1992; 103: 1732-1738.
Pandolfino JE, Kahrilas PJ. Presentation, diagnosis, and management of achalasia. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 11: 887-897.
Boeckxstaens GE, Annese V, des Varannes SB, et al; European Achalasia Trial Investigators. Pneumatic dilation versus laparoscopic Heller’s myotomy for idiopathic achalasia. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 1807-1816.
Ponds FA, Fockens P, Lei A, et al. Effect of peroral endoscopic myotomy vs pneumatic dilation on symptom severity and treatment outcomes among treatment-naive patients with achalasia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2019; 322: 134-144.
Campos GM, Vittinghoff E, Rabl C, et al. Endoscopic and surgical treatments for achalasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 2009; 249: 45-47.
Inoue H, Sato H, Ikeda H, et al. Per-oral endoscopic myotomy: a series of 500 patients. J Am Coll Surg 2015; 221: 256-264.
Nabi Z, Ramchandani M, Chavan R, et al. Per-oral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia cardia: outcomes in over 400 consecutive patients. Endosc Int Open 2017; 5: 331-339.
Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L, et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 446-454.
Byth K, Cox D. On the relation between initial value and slope. Biostatistics 2005; 6: 395-403.
Vakil N, Van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, et al; Global Consensus Group. The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 1900-1920.
Werner YB, Hakanson B, Martinek J, et al. Endoscopic or surgical myotomy in patients with idiopathic achalasia. N Engl J Med 2019; 381: 2219-2229.
Kumbhari V, Tieu AH, Onimaru M, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) vs laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) for the treatment of Type III achalasia in 75 patients: a multicenter comparative study. Endosc Int Open 2015; 3: 195-201.
Rodríguez de Santiago E, Mohammed N, Manolakis A, et al. Anterior versus posterior myotomy during poem for the treatment of achalasia: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2019; 28: 107-115.
Tyberg A, Seewald S, Sharaiha RZ, et al. A multicenter international registry of redo per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) after failed POEM. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 1208-1211.
Liu ZQ, Li QL, Chen WF, et al. The effect of prior treatment on clinical outcomes in patients with achalasia undergoing peroral endoscopic myotomy. Endoscopy 2019; 51: 307-316.
Nabi Z, Ramchandani M, Chavan R, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy in treatment-naïve achalasia patients versus prior treatment failure cases. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 358-370.