Cargando…

Outcomes of anterior myotomy versus posterior myotomy during POEM: a randomized pilot study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS:  Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) can be performed via an anterior or posterior approach, depending on the operator’s preference. Data are lacking on comparative outcomes of both approaches. PATIENTS AND METHODS:  This is a pilot randomized study comparing endoscopic ante...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ramchandani, Mohan, Nabi, Zaheer, Reddy, D. Nageshwar, Talele, Rahul, Darisetty, Santosh, Kotla, Rama, Chavan, Radhika, Tandan, Manu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2018
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5794436/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29399617
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-121877
_version_ 1783297124444667904
author Ramchandani, Mohan
Nabi, Zaheer
Reddy, D. Nageshwar
Talele, Rahul
Darisetty, Santosh
Kotla, Rama
Chavan, Radhika
Tandan, Manu
author_facet Ramchandani, Mohan
Nabi, Zaheer
Reddy, D. Nageshwar
Talele, Rahul
Darisetty, Santosh
Kotla, Rama
Chavan, Radhika
Tandan, Manu
author_sort Ramchandani, Mohan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS:  Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) can be performed via an anterior or posterior approach, depending on the operator’s preference. Data are lacking on comparative outcomes of both approaches. PATIENTS AND METHODS:  This is a pilot randomized study comparing endoscopic anterior and posterior myotomy during POEM in patients with Achalasia cardia (AC). Patients were randomized into 2 groups (n = 30 in each group); anterior myotomy group (AG) and posterior myotomy group (PG) and were followed at 1, 3 and 6 months after POEM. RESULTS:  Technical success was achieved in 100 % of cases in both groups and total operative time was comparable (AG – 65 ± 17.65 minutes versus PG – 61.2 ± 16.67; P  = 0.38); Mucosotomies were more frequent in AG (20 % vs 3.3 %; P  = 0.02). Difference in other perioperative adverse events (AE) including insufflation-related AE and bleeding in both groups were statistically insignificant. At 1-month follow-up Eckardt score AG 0.57 ± 0.56 vs PG 0.53 ± 0.71; ( P  = 0.81), mean LES pressure AG 11.93 ± 6.36 vs PG 11.77 ± 6.61; ( P  = 0.59) and esophageal emptying on timed barium swallow at 5 minutes AG 1.32 ± 1.08 cm vs PG 1.29 ± 0.79 cm; ( P  = 0.09) were comparable in both groups. At 3 months, Eckardt score (0.52 ± 0.59 vs 0.63 ± 0.62; P  = 0.51) was similar in both groups. Incidence of esophagitis on EGD was comparable in both groups (24 % vs 33.3 %; P  = 0.45), however, pH metry at 3 months showed significantly more esophageal acid exposure in posterior group (2.98 % ± 4.24 vs 13.99 % ± 14.48; P  < 0.01). At 6 months clinical efficacy and LES pressures were comparable in both groups. CONCLUSION:  Anterior and posterior approaches to POEM seem to have equal efficacy. However, the occurrence of mucosotomies was higher in the anterior myotomy group and acid exposure was higher with the posterior myotomy approach during POEM.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5794436
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher © Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57944362018-02-02 Outcomes of anterior myotomy versus posterior myotomy during POEM: a randomized pilot study Ramchandani, Mohan Nabi, Zaheer Reddy, D. Nageshwar Talele, Rahul Darisetty, Santosh Kotla, Rama Chavan, Radhika Tandan, Manu Endosc Int Open BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS:  Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) can be performed via an anterior or posterior approach, depending on the operator’s preference. Data are lacking on comparative outcomes of both approaches. PATIENTS AND METHODS:  This is a pilot randomized study comparing endoscopic anterior and posterior myotomy during POEM in patients with Achalasia cardia (AC). Patients were randomized into 2 groups (n = 30 in each group); anterior myotomy group (AG) and posterior myotomy group (PG) and were followed at 1, 3 and 6 months after POEM. RESULTS:  Technical success was achieved in 100 % of cases in both groups and total operative time was comparable (AG – 65 ± 17.65 minutes versus PG – 61.2 ± 16.67; P  = 0.38); Mucosotomies were more frequent in AG (20 % vs 3.3 %; P  = 0.02). Difference in other perioperative adverse events (AE) including insufflation-related AE and bleeding in both groups were statistically insignificant. At 1-month follow-up Eckardt score AG 0.57 ± 0.56 vs PG 0.53 ± 0.71; ( P  = 0.81), mean LES pressure AG 11.93 ± 6.36 vs PG 11.77 ± 6.61; ( P  = 0.59) and esophageal emptying on timed barium swallow at 5 minutes AG 1.32 ± 1.08 cm vs PG 1.29 ± 0.79 cm; ( P  = 0.09) were comparable in both groups. At 3 months, Eckardt score (0.52 ± 0.59 vs 0.63 ± 0.62; P  = 0.51) was similar in both groups. Incidence of esophagitis on EGD was comparable in both groups (24 % vs 33.3 %; P  = 0.45), however, pH metry at 3 months showed significantly more esophageal acid exposure in posterior group (2.98 % ± 4.24 vs 13.99 % ± 14.48; P  < 0.01). At 6 months clinical efficacy and LES pressures were comparable in both groups. CONCLUSION:  Anterior and posterior approaches to POEM seem to have equal efficacy. However, the occurrence of mucosotomies was higher in the anterior myotomy group and acid exposure was higher with the posterior myotomy approach during POEM. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2018-02 2018-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5794436/ /pubmed/29399617 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-121877 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Ramchandani, Mohan
Nabi, Zaheer
Reddy, D. Nageshwar
Talele, Rahul
Darisetty, Santosh
Kotla, Rama
Chavan, Radhika
Tandan, Manu
Outcomes of anterior myotomy versus posterior myotomy during POEM: a randomized pilot study
title Outcomes of anterior myotomy versus posterior myotomy during POEM: a randomized pilot study
title_full Outcomes of anterior myotomy versus posterior myotomy during POEM: a randomized pilot study
title_fullStr Outcomes of anterior myotomy versus posterior myotomy during POEM: a randomized pilot study
title_full_unstemmed Outcomes of anterior myotomy versus posterior myotomy during POEM: a randomized pilot study
title_short Outcomes of anterior myotomy versus posterior myotomy during POEM: a randomized pilot study
title_sort outcomes of anterior myotomy versus posterior myotomy during poem: a randomized pilot study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5794436/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29399617
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-121877
work_keys_str_mv AT ramchandanimohan outcomesofanteriormyotomyversusposteriormyotomyduringpoemarandomizedpilotstudy
AT nabizaheer outcomesofanteriormyotomyversusposteriormyotomyduringpoemarandomizedpilotstudy
AT reddydnageshwar outcomesofanteriormyotomyversusposteriormyotomyduringpoemarandomizedpilotstudy
AT talelerahul outcomesofanteriormyotomyversusposteriormyotomyduringpoemarandomizedpilotstudy
AT darisettysantosh outcomesofanteriormyotomyversusposteriormyotomyduringpoemarandomizedpilotstudy
AT kotlarama outcomesofanteriormyotomyversusposteriormyotomyduringpoemarandomizedpilotstudy
AT chavanradhika outcomesofanteriormyotomyversusposteriormyotomyduringpoemarandomizedpilotstudy
AT tandanmanu outcomesofanteriormyotomyversusposteriormyotomyduringpoemarandomizedpilotstudy