Cargando…

Efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy in the management of recurrent achalasia after failed Heller myotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Heller myotomy (HM) is an established treatment for achalasia but can fail in up to 10-20% of patients. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) may be an appropriate treatment for patients with failed HM. METHODS: We searched several databases to identify non-comparative studies evaluating the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kamal, Faisal, Ismail, Mohammad K., Khan, Muhammad A., Lee-Smith, Wade, Sharaiha, Reem Z., Sharma, Sachit, McDonough, Stephanie, Tariq, Raseen, Marella, Hemnishil K., Khan, Zubair, Heda, Rajiv P, Tombazzi, Claudio, Howden, Colin W., Adler, Douglas G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7903572/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33654353
http://dx.doi.org/10.20524/aog.2020.0563
_version_ 1783654761591996416
author Kamal, Faisal
Ismail, Mohammad K.
Khan, Muhammad A.
Lee-Smith, Wade
Sharaiha, Reem Z.
Sharma, Sachit
McDonough, Stephanie
Tariq, Raseen
Marella, Hemnishil K.
Khan, Zubair
Heda, Rajiv P
Tombazzi, Claudio
Howden, Colin W.
Adler, Douglas G.
author_facet Kamal, Faisal
Ismail, Mohammad K.
Khan, Muhammad A.
Lee-Smith, Wade
Sharaiha, Reem Z.
Sharma, Sachit
McDonough, Stephanie
Tariq, Raseen
Marella, Hemnishil K.
Khan, Zubair
Heda, Rajiv P
Tombazzi, Claudio
Howden, Colin W.
Adler, Douglas G.
author_sort Kamal, Faisal
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Heller myotomy (HM) is an established treatment for achalasia but can fail in up to 10-20% of patients. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) may be an appropriate treatment for patients with failed HM. METHODS: We searched several databases to identify non-comparative studies evaluating the efficacy and/or safety of POEM after failed HM and comparative studies comparing the efficacy and/or safety of POEM in patients with and without prior HM. Outcomes assessed included clinical success, technical success, adverse events, post-treatment gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and presence of esophagitis on endoscopy. We calculated weighted pooled rates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for all outcomes in patients undergoing POEM with prior HM. We calculated pooled odds ratios with 95%CI to compare the outcomes between patients with and without previous HM who underwent POEM. RESULTS: We included 11 observational studies with 1205 patients. Weighted pooled rates (95%CI) for overall clinical success and technical success in patients with failed HM were 87% (81-91%) and 97% (94-99%), respectively. Weighted pooled rates (95%CI) for major adverse events, new-onset GERD and presence of esophagitis on endoscopy were 5% (2-10%), 33% (26-41%), and 38% (22-58%), respectively. There were no differences in clinical success, adverse events, post-treatment GERD and esophagitis between patients with and without previous HM. CONCLUSIONS: POEM is safe and effective in patients with failed HM and should be considered in patients with recurrent achalasia after HM. Outcomes of POEM are comparable in patients with and without prior HM.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7903572
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79035722021-03-01 Efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy in the management of recurrent achalasia after failed Heller myotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis Kamal, Faisal Ismail, Mohammad K. Khan, Muhammad A. Lee-Smith, Wade Sharaiha, Reem Z. Sharma, Sachit McDonough, Stephanie Tariq, Raseen Marella, Hemnishil K. Khan, Zubair Heda, Rajiv P Tombazzi, Claudio Howden, Colin W. Adler, Douglas G. Ann Gastroenterol Original Article BACKGROUND: Heller myotomy (HM) is an established treatment for achalasia but can fail in up to 10-20% of patients. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) may be an appropriate treatment for patients with failed HM. METHODS: We searched several databases to identify non-comparative studies evaluating the efficacy and/or safety of POEM after failed HM and comparative studies comparing the efficacy and/or safety of POEM in patients with and without prior HM. Outcomes assessed included clinical success, technical success, adverse events, post-treatment gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and presence of esophagitis on endoscopy. We calculated weighted pooled rates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for all outcomes in patients undergoing POEM with prior HM. We calculated pooled odds ratios with 95%CI to compare the outcomes between patients with and without previous HM who underwent POEM. RESULTS: We included 11 observational studies with 1205 patients. Weighted pooled rates (95%CI) for overall clinical success and technical success in patients with failed HM were 87% (81-91%) and 97% (94-99%), respectively. Weighted pooled rates (95%CI) for major adverse events, new-onset GERD and presence of esophagitis on endoscopy were 5% (2-10%), 33% (26-41%), and 38% (22-58%), respectively. There were no differences in clinical success, adverse events, post-treatment GERD and esophagitis between patients with and without previous HM. CONCLUSIONS: POEM is safe and effective in patients with failed HM and should be considered in patients with recurrent achalasia after HM. Outcomes of POEM are comparable in patients with and without prior HM. Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology 2021 2020-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7903572/ /pubmed/33654353 http://dx.doi.org/10.20524/aog.2020.0563 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Kamal, Faisal
Ismail, Mohammad K.
Khan, Muhammad A.
Lee-Smith, Wade
Sharaiha, Reem Z.
Sharma, Sachit
McDonough, Stephanie
Tariq, Raseen
Marella, Hemnishil K.
Khan, Zubair
Heda, Rajiv P
Tombazzi, Claudio
Howden, Colin W.
Adler, Douglas G.
Efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy in the management of recurrent achalasia after failed Heller myotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy in the management of recurrent achalasia after failed Heller myotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy in the management of recurrent achalasia after failed Heller myotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy in the management of recurrent achalasia after failed Heller myotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy in the management of recurrent achalasia after failed Heller myotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy in the management of recurrent achalasia after failed Heller myotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy in the management of recurrent achalasia after failed heller myotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7903572/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33654353
http://dx.doi.org/10.20524/aog.2020.0563
work_keys_str_mv AT kamalfaisal efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ismailmohammadk efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT khanmuhammada efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT leesmithwade efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT sharaihareemz efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT sharmasachit efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mcdonoughstephanie efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT tariqraseen efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT marellahemnishilk efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT khanzubair efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hedarajivp efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT tombazziclaudio efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT howdencolinw efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT adlerdouglasg efficacyandsafetyofperoralendoscopicmyotomyinthemanagementofrecurrentachalasiaafterfailedhellermyotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis