Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Surgical Endoscopy
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 4/2017

01-04-2017

Impact of prior interventions on outcomes during per oral endoscopic myotomy

Authors: Brian E. Louie, Andreas M. Schneider, Drew B. Schembre, Ralph W. Aye

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 4/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is performed by accessing the submucosal space of the esophagus. This space may be impacted by prior interventions such as submucosal injections, dilations or previous myotomies. These interventions could make POEM more difficult and may deter surgeons during their initial experience. We sought to determine the impact of prior interventions on our early experience.

Methods

Prospective, single-center study of consecutive patients undergoing POEM. Patients were grouped according to their anticipated complexity: Group A: no prior interventions (N = 19); Group B: prior interventions such as submucosal injections and/or dilations (N = 11) and  Group C: sigmoidal esophagus, prior esophageal surgery, balloon dilation >30 mm (N = 8). We compared operative times, inadvertent mucosotomy rates, complications and short-term outcomes between groups.

Results

A total of 38 patients underwent POEM for achalasia subtypes: I (N = 9), II (N = 19) and III (N = 7). Three had other dysmotility disorders. Patients between the groups were similar. Operative times were similar between Group A and Group B but significantly longer for Group C (133 vs. 132 vs. 210 min, p = 0.001). Mucosotomy rates were highest in Group A (6/19) with 1 each in Group B/C (p = 0.46). One patient in Group A required an esophageal stent. Eckardt scores improved in all groups (6–1; 8–2; 6–0.5, p = 0.73), and postoperative GERD-HRQL scores were similar. One patient underwent laparoscopic myotomy for persistent symptoms with no improvement, and one patient underwent esophagectomy for a sigmoid esophagus and persistent symptoms despite adequate myotomy.

Conclusion

A prior intervention does not seem to impact short-term clinical outcomes with POEM. Patients who had submucosal injections or small caliber dilations are similar to patients with no prior inventions; however, patients with a sigmoid-shaped esophagus and/or a prior myotomy require nearly double the operative time. Endoscopists undertaking POEM should consider these during their learning curve.
Literature
1.
Cowgill SM, Villadolid DV, Al-Saadi S, Rosemurgy AS (2007) Difficult myotomy is not determined by preoperative therapy and does not impact outcome. JSLS 11(3):336–343PubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Rakita S, Bloomston M, Villadolid D, Thometz D, Zervos E, Rosemurgy A (2005) Esophagotomy during laparoscopic Heller myotomy cannot be predicted by preoperative therapies and does not influence long-term outcome. J Gastrointest Surg 9(2):159–164CrossRefPubMed
3.
Patti MG, Pellegrini CA, Horgan S, Arcerito M, Omelanczuk P, Tamburini A et al (1999) Minimally invasive surgery for achalasia: an 8-year experience with 168 patients. Ann Surg 230(4):587–593 (discussion 593–4) CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Smith CD, Stival A, Howell DL, Swafford V (2006) Endoscopic therapy for achalasia before Heller myotomy results in worse outcomes than heller myotomy alone. Ann Surg 243(5):579–584 (discussion 584–6) CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Portale G, Costantini M, Rizzetto C, Guirroli E, Ceolin M, Salvador R et al (2005) Long-term outcome of laparoscopic Heller-Dor surgery for esophageal achalasia: possible detrimental role of previous endoscopic treatment. J Gastrointest Surg 9(9):1332–1339CrossRefPubMed
6.
Orenstein SB, Raigani S, Wu YV, Pauli EM, Phillips MS, Ponsky JL et al (2015) Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) leads to similar results in patients with and without prior endoscopic or surgical therapy. Surg Endosc 29(5):1064–1070CrossRefPubMed
7.
Sharata A, Kurian AA, Dunst CM, Bhayani NH, Reavis KM, Swanström LL (2013) Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is safe and effective in the setting of prior endoscopic intervention. J Gastrointest Surg 17(7):1188–1192CrossRefPubMed
8.
Jones EL, Meara MP, Pittman MR, Hazey JW, Perry KA (2015) Prior treatment does not influence the performance or early outcomes of per oral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia. Surg Endosc 30(4):1282–1286CrossRefPubMed
9.
Eckardt VF (2001) Clinical presentations and complications of achalasia. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 11(2):281–292 (vi) PubMed
10.
Wiklund IK, Junghard O, Grace E, Talley NJ, Kamm M, Veldhuyzen van Zanten S, et al. (1998) Quality of life in reflux and dyspepsia patients. Psychometric documentation of a new disease-specific questionnaire (QOLRAD). Eur J Surg Suppl 1998(583):41–49
11.
Velanovich V (1998) Comparison of generic (sf-36) vs. disease-specific (GERD-HRQL) quality-of-life scales for gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Gastrointest Surg 2(2):141–145CrossRefPubMed
12.
Dakkak M, Bennett JR (1992) a new dysphagia score with objective validation. J Clin Gastroenterol 14(2):99–100CrossRefPubMed
13.
Louie BE, Schneider AM, Aye RW. (2016) Training, credentialing and developing a clinical program for POEM. In: Reavis KM (ed) Per Oral Endoscopic Myotomy. Springer, Berlin (In press)
14.
Swanström LL, Rieder E, Dunst CM (2011) A stepwise approach and early clinical experience in peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia and esophageal motility disorders. J Am Coll Surg 213(6):751–756CrossRefPubMed
15.
Inoue H, Sato H, Ikeda H, Onimaru M, Sato C, Minami H et al (2015) Per-oral endoscopic myotomy: a series of 500 patients. J Am Coll Surg 221(2):256–264CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Impact of prior interventions on outcomes during per oral endoscopic myotomy
Authors
Brian E. Louie
Andreas M. Schneider
Drew B. Schembre
Ralph W. Aye
Publication date
01-04-2017
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 4/2017
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5182-5

Other articles of this Issue 4/2017

Surgical Endoscopy 4/2017 Go to the issue

New Technology

Comparison of the performance of experienced and novice surgeons: measurement of gripping force during laparoscopic surgery performed on pigs using forceps with pressure sensors

OriginalPaper

Compliance of the abdominal wall during laparoscopic insufflation

OriginalPaper

Impact of Super Monkey Ball and Underground video games on basic and advanced laparoscopic skill training

OriginalPaper

Preoperative progressive pneumoperitoneum complementing chemical component relaxation in complex ventral hernia repair

OriginalPaper

Robotic partial nephrectomy performed with Airseal versus a standard CO2 pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflator: a prospective comparative study

OriginalPaper

Success and complications of an intra-ductal fully covered self-expanding metal stent (ID-FCSEMS) to treat anastomotic biliary strictures (AS) after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT)