Efficacy of anterior versus posterior per-oral endoscopic myotomy for treating achalasia: a randomized, prospective study

Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for treating achalasia. Two approaches—anterior myotomy and posterior myotomy—are used during POEM. However, little is known about the comparison between the 2 different approaches. The objective of the study is to com...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Gastrointestinal endoscopy 2018-07, Vol.88 (1), p.46-54
Hauptverfasser: Tan, Yuyong, Lv, Liang, Wang, Xuehong, Zhu, Hongyi, Chu, Yi, Luo, Min, Li, Chenjie, Zhou, Hejun, Huo, Jirong, Liu, Deliang
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 54
container_issue 1
container_start_page 46
container_title Gastrointestinal endoscopy
container_volume 88
creator Tan, Yuyong
Lv, Liang
Wang, Xuehong
Zhu, Hongyi
Chu, Yi
Luo, Min
Li, Chenjie
Zhou, Hejun
Huo, Jirong
Liu, Deliang
description Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for treating achalasia. Two approaches—anterior myotomy and posterior myotomy—are used during POEM. However, little is known about the comparison between the 2 different approaches. The objective of the study is to compare the safety and short-term efficacy of the 2 approaches for treating achalasia. From October 2015 to December 2016, 63 consecutive patients with achalasia without prior treatment or sigmoid-type esophagus were prospectively recruited. They were randomly assigned to an anterior or posterior myotomy group. Clinical data about general characteristics, operative parameters, pre- and postoperative Eckardt score, esophageal manometry results, 24-hour pH test, and adverse events were recorded and compared between the 2 groups. The anterior group included 31 patients and the posterior group 32 patients. All patients underwent POEM successfully, and treatment success (defined as an Eckardt score ≤3) was achieved in all patients during a mean follow-up of 15.5 months. Mean Eckardt score, lower esophageal sphincter pressure, and 4-second integrated relaxation pressure were significantly decreased (6.2 ± 1.3, 37.5 ± 6.7 mm Hg, and 27.3 ± 4.9 mm Hg vs .70 ± .70, 12.8 ± 2.8 mm Hg, and 11.1 ± 2.3 mm Hg, respectively; P < .01). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of general characteristics, treatment success, pre- and postoperative esophageal manometry, Eckardt score, and adverse events (P > .05). The short-term treatment efficacy, manometry outcomes, and adverse events were comparable between the anterior and posterior myotomy groups. Large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are warranted for a more definitive conclusion. (Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR-ICR-15007211.) [Display omitted]
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.gie.2018.03.009
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2018024719</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S001651071830213X</els_id><sourcerecordid>2018024719</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-8f110856d630222ca2ec2461bf799a641942ce9bc434f50368dee97342ea9bb83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1O3TAQRq2qqNwCD9BN5WUXJB3b-TNdIURbJCQ2sLYcZ0x9lcTBTq4UnoZn6ZPV9N52yWqk0fk-zRxCPjHIGbDq6zZ_dJhzYE0OIgeQ78iGgayzqq7le7KBBGUlg_qYfIxxCwANF-wDOeayrJms5IY8X1vrjDYr9ZbqccbgfKA7DHGJdPLxsJgwZD7onuLY-Wj85Mzvl2H1sx9WahMwB9SzGx-pNr90r6PTF1TToBM-uGfszukUfJzQzG6HNM5Lt56SI6v7iGeHeUIevl_fX_3Mbu9-3Fxd3mZGlGLOGssYNGXVVQI450ZzNLyoWGtrKXVVMFlwg7I1hShsCaJqOkRZi4Kjlm3biBPyZd-bLnhaMM5qcNFg3-sR_RLVqz_gRRKSULZHTTo2BrRqCm7QYVUM1KtytVVJ-d-IAqGS8pT5fKhf2gG7_4l_jhPwbQ9genLnMKhoHI4GOxeSD9V590b9H3ABlHY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2018024719</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Efficacy of anterior versus posterior per-oral endoscopic myotomy for treating achalasia: a randomized, prospective study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Tan, Yuyong ; Lv, Liang ; Wang, Xuehong ; Zhu, Hongyi ; Chu, Yi ; Luo, Min ; Li, Chenjie ; Zhou, Hejun ; Huo, Jirong ; Liu, Deliang</creator><creatorcontrib>Tan, Yuyong ; Lv, Liang ; Wang, Xuehong ; Zhu, Hongyi ; Chu, Yi ; Luo, Min ; Li, Chenjie ; Zhou, Hejun ; Huo, Jirong ; Liu, Deliang</creatorcontrib><description>Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for treating achalasia. Two approaches—anterior myotomy and posterior myotomy—are used during POEM. However, little is known about the comparison between the 2 different approaches. The objective of the study is to compare the safety and short-term efficacy of the 2 approaches for treating achalasia. From October 2015 to December 2016, 63 consecutive patients with achalasia without prior treatment or sigmoid-type esophagus were prospectively recruited. They were randomly assigned to an anterior or posterior myotomy group. Clinical data about general characteristics, operative parameters, pre- and postoperative Eckardt score, esophageal manometry results, 24-hour pH test, and adverse events were recorded and compared between the 2 groups. The anterior group included 31 patients and the posterior group 32 patients. All patients underwent POEM successfully, and treatment success (defined as an Eckardt score ≤3) was achieved in all patients during a mean follow-up of 15.5 months. Mean Eckardt score, lower esophageal sphincter pressure, and 4-second integrated relaxation pressure were significantly decreased (6.2 ± 1.3, 37.5 ± 6.7 mm Hg, and 27.3 ± 4.9 mm Hg vs .70 ± .70, 12.8 ± 2.8 mm Hg, and 11.1 ± 2.3 mm Hg, respectively; P &lt; .01). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of general characteristics, treatment success, pre- and postoperative esophageal manometry, Eckardt score, and adverse events (P &gt; .05). The short-term treatment efficacy, manometry outcomes, and adverse events were comparable between the anterior and posterior myotomy groups. Large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are warranted for a more definitive conclusion. (Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR-ICR-15007211.) [Display omitted]</description><identifier>ISSN: 0016-5107</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6779</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.03.009</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29571969</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Endoscopy, Digestive System - methods ; Esophageal Achalasia - physiopathology ; Esophageal Achalasia - surgery ; Esophageal pH Monitoring ; Esophageal Sphincter, Lower - physiopathology ; Esophageal Sphincter, Lower - surgery ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Manometry ; Middle Aged ; Myotomy - methods ; Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery - methods ; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology ; Prospective Studies ; Treatment Outcome ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2018-07, Vol.88 (1), p.46-54</ispartof><rights>2018 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-8f110856d630222ca2ec2461bf799a641942ce9bc434f50368dee97342ea9bb83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-8f110856d630222ca2ec2461bf799a641942ce9bc434f50368dee97342ea9bb83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001651071830213X$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65534</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29571969$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tan, Yuyong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lv, Liang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Xuehong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Hongyi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chu, Yi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Luo, Min</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Chenjie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhou, Hejun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huo, Jirong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Deliang</creatorcontrib><title>Efficacy of anterior versus posterior per-oral endoscopic myotomy for treating achalasia: a randomized, prospective study</title><title>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</title><addtitle>Gastrointest Endosc</addtitle><description>Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for treating achalasia. Two approaches—anterior myotomy and posterior myotomy—are used during POEM. However, little is known about the comparison between the 2 different approaches. The objective of the study is to compare the safety and short-term efficacy of the 2 approaches for treating achalasia. From October 2015 to December 2016, 63 consecutive patients with achalasia without prior treatment or sigmoid-type esophagus were prospectively recruited. They were randomly assigned to an anterior or posterior myotomy group. Clinical data about general characteristics, operative parameters, pre- and postoperative Eckardt score, esophageal manometry results, 24-hour pH test, and adverse events were recorded and compared between the 2 groups. The anterior group included 31 patients and the posterior group 32 patients. All patients underwent POEM successfully, and treatment success (defined as an Eckardt score ≤3) was achieved in all patients during a mean follow-up of 15.5 months. Mean Eckardt score, lower esophageal sphincter pressure, and 4-second integrated relaxation pressure were significantly decreased (6.2 ± 1.3, 37.5 ± 6.7 mm Hg, and 27.3 ± 4.9 mm Hg vs .70 ± .70, 12.8 ± 2.8 mm Hg, and 11.1 ± 2.3 mm Hg, respectively; P &lt; .01). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of general characteristics, treatment success, pre- and postoperative esophageal manometry, Eckardt score, and adverse events (P &gt; .05). The short-term treatment efficacy, manometry outcomes, and adverse events were comparable between the anterior and posterior myotomy groups. Large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are warranted for a more definitive conclusion. (Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR-ICR-15007211.) [Display omitted]</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Endoscopy, Digestive System - methods</subject><subject>Esophageal Achalasia - physiopathology</subject><subject>Esophageal Achalasia - surgery</subject><subject>Esophageal pH Monitoring</subject><subject>Esophageal Sphincter, Lower - physiopathology</subject><subject>Esophageal Sphincter, Lower - surgery</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Manometry</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Myotomy - methods</subject><subject>Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery - methods</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0016-5107</issn><issn>1097-6779</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1O3TAQRq2qqNwCD9BN5WUXJB3b-TNdIURbJCQ2sLYcZ0x9lcTBTq4UnoZn6ZPV9N52yWqk0fk-zRxCPjHIGbDq6zZ_dJhzYE0OIgeQ78iGgayzqq7le7KBBGUlg_qYfIxxCwANF-wDOeayrJms5IY8X1vrjDYr9ZbqccbgfKA7DHGJdPLxsJgwZD7onuLY-Wj85Mzvl2H1sx9WahMwB9SzGx-pNr90r6PTF1TToBM-uGfszukUfJzQzG6HNM5Lt56SI6v7iGeHeUIevl_fX_3Mbu9-3Fxd3mZGlGLOGssYNGXVVQI450ZzNLyoWGtrKXVVMFlwg7I1hShsCaJqOkRZi4Kjlm3biBPyZd-bLnhaMM5qcNFg3-sR_RLVqz_gRRKSULZHTTo2BrRqCm7QYVUM1KtytVVJ-d-IAqGS8pT5fKhf2gG7_4l_jhPwbQ9genLnMKhoHI4GOxeSD9V590b9H3ABlHY</recordid><startdate>201807</startdate><enddate>201807</enddate><creator>Tan, Yuyong</creator><creator>Lv, Liang</creator><creator>Wang, Xuehong</creator><creator>Zhu, Hongyi</creator><creator>Chu, Yi</creator><creator>Luo, Min</creator><creator>Li, Chenjie</creator><creator>Zhou, Hejun</creator><creator>Huo, Jirong</creator><creator>Liu, Deliang</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201807</creationdate><title>Efficacy of anterior versus posterior per-oral endoscopic myotomy for treating achalasia: a randomized, prospective study</title><author>Tan, Yuyong ; Lv, Liang ; Wang, Xuehong ; Zhu, Hongyi ; Chu, Yi ; Luo, Min ; Li, Chenjie ; Zhou, Hejun ; Huo, Jirong ; Liu, Deliang</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-8f110856d630222ca2ec2461bf799a641942ce9bc434f50368dee97342ea9bb83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Endoscopy, Digestive System - methods</topic><topic>Esophageal Achalasia - physiopathology</topic><topic>Esophageal Achalasia - surgery</topic><topic>Esophageal pH Monitoring</topic><topic>Esophageal Sphincter, Lower - physiopathology</topic><topic>Esophageal Sphincter, Lower - surgery</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Manometry</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Myotomy - methods</topic><topic>Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery - methods</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tan, Yuyong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lv, Liang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Xuehong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Hongyi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chu, Yi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Luo, Min</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Chenjie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhou, Hejun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huo, Jirong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Deliang</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tan, Yuyong</au><au>Lv, Liang</au><au>Wang, Xuehong</au><au>Zhu, Hongyi</au><au>Chu, Yi</au><au>Luo, Min</au><au>Li, Chenjie</au><au>Zhou, Hejun</au><au>Huo, Jirong</au><au>Liu, Deliang</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Efficacy of anterior versus posterior per-oral endoscopic myotomy for treating achalasia: a randomized, prospective study</atitle><jtitle>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</jtitle><addtitle>Gastrointest Endosc</addtitle><date>2018-07</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>88</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>46</spage><epage>54</epage><pages>46-54</pages><issn>0016-5107</issn><eissn>1097-6779</eissn><abstract>Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for treating achalasia. Two approaches—anterior myotomy and posterior myotomy—are used during POEM. However, little is known about the comparison between the 2 different approaches. The objective of the study is to compare the safety and short-term efficacy of the 2 approaches for treating achalasia. From October 2015 to December 2016, 63 consecutive patients with achalasia without prior treatment or sigmoid-type esophagus were prospectively recruited. They were randomly assigned to an anterior or posterior myotomy group. Clinical data about general characteristics, operative parameters, pre- and postoperative Eckardt score, esophageal manometry results, 24-hour pH test, and adverse events were recorded and compared between the 2 groups. The anterior group included 31 patients and the posterior group 32 patients. All patients underwent POEM successfully, and treatment success (defined as an Eckardt score ≤3) was achieved in all patients during a mean follow-up of 15.5 months. Mean Eckardt score, lower esophageal sphincter pressure, and 4-second integrated relaxation pressure were significantly decreased (6.2 ± 1.3, 37.5 ± 6.7 mm Hg, and 27.3 ± 4.9 mm Hg vs .70 ± .70, 12.8 ± 2.8 mm Hg, and 11.1 ± 2.3 mm Hg, respectively; P &lt; .01). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of general characteristics, treatment success, pre- and postoperative esophageal manometry, Eckardt score, and adverse events (P &gt; .05). The short-term treatment efficacy, manometry outcomes, and adverse events were comparable between the anterior and posterior myotomy groups. Large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are warranted for a more definitive conclusion. (Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR-ICR-15007211.) [Display omitted]</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>29571969</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.gie.2018.03.009</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0016-5107
ispartof Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2018-07, Vol.88 (1), p.46-54
issn 0016-5107
1097-6779
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2018024719
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Endoscopy, Digestive System - methods
Esophageal Achalasia - physiopathology
Esophageal Achalasia - surgery
Esophageal pH Monitoring
Esophageal Sphincter, Lower - physiopathology
Esophageal Sphincter, Lower - surgery
Female
Humans
Male
Manometry
Middle Aged
Myotomy - methods
Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery - methods
Postoperative Complications - epidemiology
Prospective Studies
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult
title Efficacy of anterior versus posterior per-oral endoscopic myotomy for treating achalasia: a randomized, prospective study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-18T18%3A20%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Efficacy%20of%20anterior%20versus%20posterior%20per-oral%20endoscopic%C2%A0myotomy%20for%20treating%20achalasia:%20a%20randomized,%20prospective%20study&rft.jtitle=Gastrointestinal%20endoscopy&rft.au=Tan,%20Yuyong&rft.date=2018-07&rft.volume=88&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=46&rft.epage=54&rft.pages=46-54&rft.issn=0016-5107&rft.eissn=1097-6779&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.gie.2018.03.009&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2018024719%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2018024719&rft_id=info:pmid/29571969&rft_els_id=S001651071830213X&rfr_iscdi=true