Search

Background: Whether Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM) can be proposed as a second-line treatment in patients with achalasia remains to be confirmed in real-life series., Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy, feasibility and safety of POEM between treatment-naïve patients and patients who had prior endoscopic or surgical therapies for achalasia., Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent a POEM procedure for achalasia in our centre from June 2015 to September 2018 were included in this retrospective study. They were classified into treatment-naïve patients (POEM1) and patients who had at least one previous endoscopic and/or surgical treatment for achalasia (POEM2)., Results: A total of 105 patients were included, 52 in the POEM1 group and 53 in the POEM2 group. Clinical success (defined as an Eckardt score ≤ 3) at 6 months was observed in 93% of POEM1 patients and 84% of POEM2 patients (p = 0.18). Technical success rate was not significantly different between the two groups (100% vs 96%, respectively; p = 0.50). No significant difference was noted in terms of adverse event rate (19% vs 19%, respectively; p = 1.00). Post-procedure pain occurred in 12% of treatment-naive and 9% of non-naïve patients (p = 0.76). The median length of hospital stay was 3 days in both groups (p = 0.17). Symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux occurred in 25% of POEM1 patients and 16% of POEM2 patients (p = 0.24)., Conclusion: Efficacy, feasibility and safety of POEM are not different between treatment-naïve and non-naïve patients. POEM is a valuable second-line approach in patients with persistent symptoms of achalasia after surgical or endoscopic treatments., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Many experts consider laparoscopic Heller's myotomy (LHM) to be superior to pneumatic dilation for the treatment of achalasia, and LHM is increasingly considered to be the treatment of choice for this disorder., Methods: We randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed achalasia to pneumatic dilation or LHM with Dor's fundoplication. Symptoms, including weight loss, dysphagia, retrosternal pain, and regurgitation, were assessed with the use of the Eckardt score (which ranges from 0 to 12, with higher scores indicating more pronounced symptoms). The primary outcome was therapeutic success (a drop in the Eckardt score to ≤3) at the yearly follow-up assessment. The secondary outcomes included the need for retreatment, pressure at the lower esophageal sphincter, esophageal emptying on a timed barium esophagogram, quality of life, and the rate of complications., Results: A total of 201 patients were randomly assigned to pneumatic dilation (95 patients) or LHM (106). The mean follow-up time was 43 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 40 to 47). In an intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the primary outcome; the rate of therapeutic success with pneumatic dilation was 90% after 1 year of follow-up and 86% after 2 years, as compared with a rate with LHM of 93% after 1 year and 90% after 2 years (P=0.46). After 2 years of follow-up, there was no significant between-group difference in the pressure at the lower esophageal sphincter (LHM, 10 mm Hg [95% CI, 8.7 to 12]; pneumatic dilation, 12 mm Hg [95% CI, 9.7 to 14]; P=0.27); esophageal emptying, as assessed by the height of barium-contrast column (LHM, 1.9 cm [95% CI, 0 to 6.8]; pneumatic dilation, 3.7 cm [95% CI, 0 to 8.8]; P=0.21); or quality of life. Similar results were obtained in the per-protocol analysis. Perforation of the esophagus occurred in 4% of the patients during pneumatic dilation, whereas mucosal tears occurred in 12% during LHM. Abnormal exposure to esophageal acid was observed in 15% and 23% of the patients in the pneumatic-dilation and LHM groups, respectively (P=0.28)., Conclusions: After 2 years of follow-up, LHM, as compared with pneumatic dilation, was not associated with superior rates of therapeutic success. (European Achalasia Trial Netherlands Trial Register number, NTR37, and Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN56304564.).