Evidence Hub

Gastroesophageal reflux after per oral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia: results of a monocentric cohort

Laurine Estermann, Sophie Testu, J. Rivory, F. Rostain, T. Ponchon, M. Pioche, Sabine Roman, F. Mion

Clinics And Research in Hepatology and Gastroenterology, 2024

422 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has become the first line treatment for achalasia, but controversies remain about the prevalence of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) after the procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate post-POEM GERD by a retrospective analysis of a single center cohort.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Achalasia patients aged 18 or above, who underwent POEM between 2012 and 2021, were included, provided they had an endoscopic control of reflux at least one year after POEM. GERD symptoms based on GerdQ questionnaire, and proton pomp inhibitors (PPI) consumption were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Among a consecutive cohort of 422 patients treated by POEM, 254 patients were included. Endoscopic results were available after a mean follow-up of 1.9 ± 1.5 years. 71/254 patients (28 %) had erosive esophagitis (86 % Los Angeles Grade A or B). At the last follow-up (mean 4.5 ± 2.2 years), clinical success of POEM (Eckardt score ≤ 3) was achieved in 79.5 % of patients. 44.5 % of patients were on PPI. Mean GerdQ score was 2.2 ± 2.7, with only 13 patients (6.5 %) with a score ≥ 8.

CONCLUSION

In this cohort of achalasia patients with an endoscopic follow-up at least 1 year after POEM, GERD did not appear a major threat concern: clinical symptoms were mild in most cases, as was the degree of erosive esophagitis. Furthermore, at the time of last follow up, less than half of patients required treatment with PPI.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 422 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