Short versus standard esophageal myotomy in achalasia patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
Background and study aims Despite the clinical efficacy of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), postoperative symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains a major concern. While it is known that length of the gastric myotomy affects postoperative GERD, the clinical relevance of variation...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
2021-07-01
|
Series: | Endoscopy International Open |
Online Access: | http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/a-1490-8493 |
id |
doaj-1359457055444dc488ae9e92d6bb6d8a |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-1359457055444dc488ae9e92d6bb6d8a2021-08-24T08:40:29ZengGeorg Thieme Verlag KGEndoscopy International Open2364-37222196-97362021-07-010908E1246E125410.1055/a-1490-8493Short versus standard esophageal myotomy in achalasia patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studiesSaurabh Chandan0Antonio Facciorusso1Shahab R. Khan2Daryl Ramai3Babu P. Mohan4Mohammad Bilal5Banreet Dhindsa6Lena L. Kassab7Hemant Goyal8Abhilash Perisetti9Ishfaq Bhat10Shailender Singh11Stephanie McDonough12Douglas G. Adler13Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, CHI Creighton University Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, United StatesGastroenterology Unit, Department of Surgical and Medical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, ItalySection of Gastroenterology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, United StatesInternal Medicine, Brooklyn Hospital Center, Brooklyn, New York, United StatesDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, United StatesDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Minnesota and Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United StatesGastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, United StatesInternal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United StatesGastroenterology, Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education, Scranton, Philadelphia, United StatesGastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas, United States Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, United StatesGastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, United StatesDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, United StatesDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, United StatesBackground and study aims Despite the clinical efficacy of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), postoperative symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains a major concern. While it is known that length of the gastric myotomy affects postoperative GERD, the clinical relevance of variation in esophageal myotomy length is not well known. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing outcomes of short versus standard myotomy length in patients with achalasia. Patients and methods We searched multiple databases from inception through November 2020 to identify studies that reported on outcomes of achalasia patients who underwent short compared with standard esophageal myotomy. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled odds ratio (OR) of clinical success, GERD outcomes, and adverse events with the two techniques. Results 5 studies with 474 patients were included in the final analysis (short myotomy group 214, standard myotomy group 260). There was no difference in clinical success (OR 1.17, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.54–2.52; I2 0 %; P = 0.69), postoperative symptomatic GERD (OR 0.87, 95 %CI 0.44–1.74; I2 29 %; P = 0.70), and overall adverse events (OR 0.52, 95 %CI 0.19–1.38; I2 40 %; P = 0.19), between the two groups. Incidence of postoperative erosive esophagitis as determined by endoscopy was lower in the short myotomy group (OR 0.50, 95 %CI 0.24–1.03; I2 0 %; P = 0.06). Conclusion Our analysis showed that performing POEM with short esophageal myotomy in achalasia was as safe and effective as standard myotomy, with lower incidence of postoperative erosive esophagitis.http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/a-1490-8493 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Saurabh Chandan Antonio Facciorusso Shahab R. Khan Daryl Ramai Babu P. Mohan Mohammad Bilal Banreet Dhindsa Lena L. Kassab Hemant Goyal Abhilash Perisetti Ishfaq Bhat Shailender Singh Stephanie McDonough Douglas G. Adler |
spellingShingle |
Saurabh Chandan Antonio Facciorusso Shahab R. Khan Daryl Ramai Babu P. Mohan Mohammad Bilal Banreet Dhindsa Lena L. Kassab Hemant Goyal Abhilash Perisetti Ishfaq Bhat Shailender Singh Stephanie McDonough Douglas G. Adler Short versus standard esophageal myotomy in achalasia patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies Endoscopy International Open |
author_facet |
Saurabh Chandan Antonio Facciorusso Shahab R. Khan Daryl Ramai Babu P. Mohan Mohammad Bilal Banreet Dhindsa Lena L. Kassab Hemant Goyal Abhilash Perisetti Ishfaq Bhat Shailender Singh Stephanie McDonough Douglas G. Adler |
author_sort |
Saurabh Chandan |
title |
Short versus standard esophageal myotomy in achalasia patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies |
title_short |
Short versus standard esophageal myotomy in achalasia patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies |
title_full |
Short versus standard esophageal myotomy in achalasia patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies |
title_fullStr |
Short versus standard esophageal myotomy in achalasia patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies |
title_full_unstemmed |
Short versus standard esophageal myotomy in achalasia patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies |
title_sort |
short versus standard esophageal myotomy in achalasia patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies |
publisher |
Georg Thieme Verlag KG |
series |
Endoscopy International Open |
issn |
2364-3722 2196-9736 |
publishDate |
2021-07-01 |
description |
Background and study aims Despite the clinical efficacy of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), postoperative symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains a major concern. While it is known that length of the gastric myotomy affects postoperative GERD, the clinical relevance of variation in esophageal myotomy length is not well known. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing outcomes of short versus standard myotomy length in patients with achalasia.
Patients and methods We searched multiple databases from inception through November 2020 to identify studies that reported on outcomes of achalasia patients who underwent short compared with standard esophageal myotomy. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled odds ratio (OR) of clinical success, GERD outcomes, and adverse events with the two techniques.
Results 5 studies with 474 patients were included in the final analysis (short myotomy group 214, standard myotomy group 260). There was no difference in clinical success (OR 1.17, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.54–2.52; I2 0 %; P = 0.69), postoperative symptomatic GERD (OR 0.87, 95 %CI 0.44–1.74; I2 29 %; P = 0.70), and overall adverse events (OR 0.52, 95 %CI 0.19–1.38; I2 40 %; P = 0.19), between the two groups. Incidence of postoperative erosive esophagitis as determined by endoscopy was lower in the short myotomy group (OR 0.50, 95 %CI 0.24–1.03; I2 0 %; P = 0.06).
Conclusion Our analysis showed that performing POEM with short esophageal myotomy in achalasia was as safe and effective as standard myotomy, with lower incidence of postoperative erosive esophagitis. |
url |
http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/a-1490-8493 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT saurabhchandan shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT antoniofacciorusso shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT shahabrkhan shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT darylramai shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT babupmohan shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT mohammadbilal shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT banreetdhindsa shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT lenalkassab shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT hemantgoyal shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT abhilashperisetti shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT ishfaqbhat shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT shailendersingh shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT stephaniemcdonough shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies AT douglasgadler shortversusstandardesophagealmyotomyinachalasiapatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies |
_version_ |
1721197666532065280 |