Evidence Hub

Sa1282 PERORAL ENDOSCOPIC MYOTOMY FOR ACHALASIA PATIENTS WITH PRIOR HELLER MYOTOMY: A SYSTEMATIC REIVEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Zhen-zi Huang, Yi Cui, Yuanqi Li, Minhu Chen, Xiang-Bin Xing

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2020

272 participants

Abstract

Abstract Background and Aims Heller myotomy (HM) is considered the standard surgical treatment for achalasia patients. However, approximately 10% to 20% of achalasia patients have persistent or recurrent symptoms after HM that require further therapy. Several studies have reported the outcomes of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in these patients. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of POEM in achalasia patients with prior HM. Methods An electronic literature search was conducted of PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane library up to Jan 31, 2020. Studies evaluating the outcomes of POEM in achalasia patients with prior HM were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcomes were the pooled rates of clinical success (defined as post-POEM Eckardt score ≤3), mean change in Eckardt score, lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, and integrated relaxation pressure (IRP). The secondary outcomes were procedure-related adverse events (AEs) and incidence of postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Results A total of 9 studies with 272 achalasia patients were recruited in this review. POEM was successfully performed in 270 (99.3%) patients after prior HM. Clinical success was achieved in 90.0% (95% CI, 83.1%-96.8%) of patients. Eckardt score, LES pressure and IRP were significantly lowered by 5.14 (95% CI, 4.19-6.09), 12.01 mm Hg (95% CI, 6.74–17.27) and 10.02 mm Hg (95% CI, 4.95–15.09), respectively. The pooled rates of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 272 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free