Comparative Study Between Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy Versus Pneumatic Dilatation for Treatment of Early Achalasia: A Prospective Randomized Study

Paediatric achalasia - what is different?

BACKGROUND

Achalasia is a rare condition characterized by disturbed oesophageal motility. Therapeutic control of symptoms is difficult to achieve, and no curative approach is available. Laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) is the treatment of choice for achalasia. We describe our experience in paediatric patients with achalasia treated at a tertiary paediatric surgery center.

METHODS

A retrospective longitudinal cohort study was conducted in paediatric patients diagnosed with achalasia in a tertiary paediatric surgery center from 2005 to 2022.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients with achalasia were selected; 13 were males (81.2%) and the mean age was 11.6(±2.16) years. The most common presentation of the disease was solid dysphagia (93.8%). Timed esophagogram was performed in 15 patients (93.8%), manometry was conducted in 12 patients (75%) and all patients were submitted to upper endoscopy. All patients were submitted to LHM with Dor fundoplicature. All patients had postoperative relief of symptoms in the immediate postoperative period. The median postoperative follow-up time was 4 (0.6-11) years. Two patients (12.5%) needed endoscopic dilatation due to relapsed symptoms. Three patients (18.8%) suffered from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). No patient needed re-operation for achalasia.

CONCLUSION

LHM is safe and effective in the symptomatic relief of achalasia in paediatric patients. Nonetheless, there is no proved curative treatment for achalasia. Close follow-up is essential for disease control in the long term.

Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic Heller's myotomy versus pneumatic dilatation for achalasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Achalasia has several treatment modalities. We aim to compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) with those of pneumatic dilatation (PD) in adult patients suffering from achalasia.

METHODS

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS and Embase for related clinical trials about patients suffering from achalasia. The quality appraisal and assessment of risk of bias were conducted with GRADE and Cochrane's risk of bias tool, respectively. Homogeneous and heterogeneous data was analyzed under fixed and random-effects models, respectively.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis of 10 studies showed that PD was associated with a higher rate of remission at three months, one year, three years and five years (RR = 1.25 [1.09, 1.42] (p = 0.001); RR = 1.13 [1.05, 1.20] (p = 0.0004); RR = 1.48 [1.19, 1.82] (p = 0.0003); RR = 1.49 [1.18, 1.89] (p = 0.001)), respectively. LHM was associated with lower number of cases suffering from adverse events, dysphagia and relapses (RR = 0.50 [0.25, 0.98] (p = 0.04); RR = 0.33 [0.16, 0.71] (p = 0.004); RR = 0.38 [0.15, 0.97] (p = 0.04)), respectively. There is no significant difference between both groups regarding the lower esophageal pressure, perforations, remission rate at two years, Eckardt score after one year and reflux.

CONCLUSION

PD had higher remission rates than LHM at three months, one year and three years, but not at two years or five years. More research is needed to determine whether PD has a significant advantage over LHM in terms of long-term remission rates.

An overview of the efficacy, safety, and predictors of achalasia treatments

INTRODUCTION

Achalasia is a rare esophageal motility disorder characterized by abnormal esophageal peristalsis and the inability of the lower esophageal sphincter to relax, resulting in poor esophageal emptying. This can be relieved by endoscopic and surgical treatments; each comes with certain advantages and disadvantages.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to guide the clinician in clinical decision making on the different treatment options for achalasia regarding the efficacy, safety, and important predictors.

EXPERT OPINION

Botulinum toxin injection is only recommended for a selective group of achalasia patients because of the short term effect. Pneumatic dilation improves achalasia symptoms, but this effect diminishes over time and requiring repeated dilations to maintain clinical effect. Heller myotomy combined with fundoplication and peroral endoscopic myotomy are highly effective on the long term but are more invasive than dilations. Gastro-esophageal reflux complaints are more often encountered after peroral endoscopic myotomy. Patient factors such as age, comorbidities, and type of achalasia must be taken into account when choosing a treatment. The preference of the patient is also of great importance and therefore shared decision making has to play a fundamental role in deciding about treatment.

Advances in the Diagnosis and Management of Achalasia and Achalasia-Like Syndromes: Insights From HRM and FLIP

High-resolution manometry, Chicago Classification v4.0, the functional lumen imaging probe, Panometry, and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) are all now integral parts of the landscape for managing achalasia or, more precisely, achalasia-like syndromes. This narrative review examines the impact of these innovations on the management of achalasia-like syndromes. High-resolution manometry was the disruptive technology that prompted the paradigm shift to thinking of motility disorders as patterns of obstructive physiology involving the esophagogastric junction and/or the distal esophagus rather than as siloed entities. An early observation was that the cardinal feature of achalasia-impaired lower esophageal sphincter relaxation-can occur in several subtypes: without peristalsis, with pan-esophageal pressurization, with premature (spastic) distal esophageal contractions, or even with preserved peristalsis (esophagogastric junction outlet obstruction). Furthermore, there being no biomarker for achalasia, no manometric pattern is perfectly sensitive or specific for 'achalasia' and there is also no 'gold standard' for the diagnosis. Consequently, complimentary physiological testing with a timed barium esophagram or functional lumen imaging probe are employed both to improve the detection of patients likely to respond to treatments for 'achalasia' and to characterize other syndromes also likely to benefit from achalasia therapies. These findings have become particularly relevant with the development of a minimally invasive technique for performing a tailored esophageal myotomy, POEM. Now and in the future, optimal achalasia management is to render treatment in a phenotype-specific manner, that is, POEM calibrated in a patient-specific manner for obstructive physiology including the distal esophagus and more conservative strategies such as a short POEM or pneumatic dilation for obstructive physiology limited to the lower esophageal sphincter.

Achalasia: Current therapeutic options

Achalasia is an esophageal motor disorder characterized by impaired relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and absent peristalsis in the smooth muscle esophageal body. As a result, patients typically experience dysphagia, regurgitation, chest pain, and weight loss. Over the past 10-15 years, there has been a resurgence of interest in the evaluation of therapies for achalasia. Unfortunately, little progress in the development of effective pharmacological treatments has been made. Botulinum toxin injection provides some relief of symptoms in many patients but requires periodic reinjection that may provide progressively less benefit over time. There are now three well-established, safe, and effective therapies for the treatment of achalasia: pneumatic dilation (PD), laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM), and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) which can lead to marked symptom improvement in most patients. Each treatment has a specific constellation of risks, benefits, and recurrence rate. The first-line treatment used will depend on patient preference, achalasia subtype, and local expertise. The recent impressive advances in both the art and science of achalasia therapy are explored with a comprehensive review of the various treatment modalities and comparative controlled clinical trials. In addition, key technical pearls of the procedural treatments are demonstrated.

Major adverse events related to endoscopic or laparoscopic procedures in achalasia. A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Surgical or endoscopic treatments play an essential role in the management of achalasia. The probability of adverse events in the performance of said treatments is a relevant aspect, when establishing the risk-benefit balance. The present study aimed to establish the association between serious adverse events and the performance of those procedures, in adult patients with achalasia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systemic search of randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials, retrospective cohorts, and cases series on adult patients with achalasia that underwent laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM), peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), or endoscopic balloon dilation, that reported serious adverse events, was carried out on the Medline, CENTRAL, and EBSCO databases. Serious adverse events were defined as: death at 30 days, Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher classification, esophageal or gastric perforation, pneumothorax, mucosal tear, leakage, emphysema, pneumonia, and chest pain. The methodology included the PRISMA guidelines for reporting systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies were found that reported information on 1,276 patients that underwent POEM, 5,492 that underwent LHM, and 10,346 that underwent endoscopic balloon dilation. The proportions of adverse events for the three techniques were 3.6, 4.9, and 3.1%, respectively.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The 3 therapeutic interventions evaluated had similar proportions of adverse events. There were few reports of death at 30 days as an outcome and the lack of standardization in reporting adverse events in the studies analyzed was prominent.

Effectiveness and complication of achalasia treatment: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Achalasia(AC) is an esophageal motility disorder characterized by decreased esophageal motility and impaired relaxation of lower esophageal sphincter(LES). The treatment of achalasia is continuously improved for the development of technology, but each treatment has its own advantages and disadvantages. This article was to compare the efficacy and complication of different treatment on AC. PUBMED/MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for eligible studies. A random-effects model within a Bayesian framework was applied to compare treatment effects as odds ratio (OR) with their corresponding 95% credible interval (CI), also OR was applied to compare complication with 95% CI. The surface under the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) was calculated to make the ranking of the treatments for outcomes. Twenty-seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were eligible. According to SUCRA ranking, anterior peroral endoscopic myotomy (APOEM) (SUCRA = 84.6%) might have the highest probability to be the best treatment for dysphagia remission in AC patients, followed by POEM (SUCRA = 78.4%). For gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) assessment, the corresponding SUCRA values indicated that botulinum toxin(BT) (SUCRA = 18.3%) might have lowest GERD incidence rate and POEM ranked the worst (SUCRA = 69.8%).. APOEM might have the highest probability to be the best therapeutic strategy for dysphagia remission in a short-term of follow-up, but the GERD incidence rate was high. BT injection might have the lowest probability to treat dysphagia, but the risk of GERD was the lowest. In the future, more RCTs with higher qualities are needed to make head-to-head comparison between 2 or more treatments.

Comparative efficacy of first-line therapeutic interventions for achalasia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several interventions with variable efficacy are available as first-line therapy for patients with achalasia. We assessed the comparative efficacy of different strategies for management of achalasia, through a network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect treatment comparisons.

METHODS

We identified six randomized controlled trials in adults with achalasia that compared the efficacy of pneumatic dilation (PD; n = 260), laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM; n = 309), and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM; n = 176). Primary efficacy outcome was 1-year treatment success (patient-reported improvement in symptoms based on validated scores); secondary efficacy outcomes were 2-year treatment success and physiologic improvement; safety outcomes were risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), severe erosive esophagitis, and procedure-related serious adverse events. We performed pairwise and network meta-analysis for all treatments, and used GRADE criteria to appraise quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Low-quality evidence, based primarily on direct evidence, supports the use of POEM (RR [risk ratio], 1.29; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.99-1.69), and LHM (RR, 1.18 [0.96-1.44]) over PD for treatment success at 1 year; no significant difference was observed between LHM and POEM (RR 1.09 [0.86-1.39]). The incidence of severe esophagitis after POEM, LHM, and PD was 5.3%, 3.7%, and 1.5%, respectively. Procedure-related serious adverse event rate after POEM, LHM, and PD was 1.4%, 6.7%, and 4.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

POEM and LHM have comparable efficacy, and may increase treatment success as compared to PD with low confidence in estimates. POEM may have lower rate of serious adverse events compared to LHM and PD, but higher rate of GERD.

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) vs pneumatic dilation (PD) in treatment of achalasia: A meta-analysis of studies with ≥ 12-month follow-up

Background and study aims  Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is increasingly being used as the preferred treatment option for achalasia. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of POEM versus pneumatic balloon dilation (PD). Methods  We performed a comprehensive review of studies that reported clinical outcomes of POEM and PD for the treatment of achalasia. Measured outcomes included clinical success (improvement of symptoms based on a validated scale including an Eckardt score ≤ 3), adverse events, and post-treatment gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Results  Sixty-six studies (6268 patients) were included in the final analysis, of which 29 studies (2919 patients) reported on POEM and 33 studies (3050 patients) reported on PD and 4 studies (299 patients) compared POEM versus PD. Clinical success with POEM was superior to PD at 12, 24, and 36 months (92.9 %, vs 76.9 % P  = 0.001; 90.6 % vs 74.8 %, P  = 0.004; 88.4 % vs 72.2 %, P  = 0.006, respectively). POEM was superior to PD in type I, II and III achalasia (92.7 % vs 61 %, P  = 0.01; 92.3 % vs 80.3 %, P  = 0.01; 92.3 %v 41.9 %, P  = 0.01 respectively) Pooled OR of clinical success at 12 and 24 months were significantly higher with POEM (8.97; P  = 0.001 & 5.64; P  = 0.006). Pooled OR of GERD was significantly higher with POEM (by symptoms: 2.95, P  = 0.02 and by endoscopic findings: 6.98, P  = 0.001). Rates of esophageal perforation (0.3 % vs 0.6 %, P  = 0.8) and significant bleeding (0.4 % vs 0.7 %, P  = 0.56) were comparable between POEM and PD groups. Conclusions  POEM is more efficacious than PD in the treatment of patients with achalasia during short-term and long-term follow-up, albeit with higher risk of abnormal esophageal acid exposure.

European guidelines on achalasia: United European Gastroenterology and European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility recommendations

INTRODUCTION

Achalasia is a primary motor disorder of the oesophagus characterised by absence of peristalsis and insufficient lower oesophageal sphincter relaxation. With new advances and developments in achalasia management, there is an increasing demand for comprehensive evidence-based guidelines to assist clinicians in achalasia patient care.

METHODS

Guidelines were established by a working group of representatives from United European Gastroenterology, European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology and the European Association of Endoscopic Surgery in accordance with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Recommendations were voted upon using a nominal group technique.

RESULTS

These guidelines focus on the definition of achalasia, treatment aims, diagnostic tests, medical, endoscopic and surgical therapy, management of treatment failure, follow-up and oesophageal cancer risk.

CONCLUSION

These multidisciplinary guidelines provide a comprehensive evidence-based framework with recommendations on the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of adult achalasia patients.

Gastric Stenosis After Sleeve Gastrectomy: an Algorithm for Management

BACKGROUND

Gastric stenosis (GS) is a well-recognized complication after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) with a negative impact on patients' nutritional status and quality of life. There is no consensus on a validated, comprehensive management algorithm for GS. This study evaluates treatment modalities and proposes a management algorithm for obstructive gastric symptoms (OGSs) after SG.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with GS after SG between January 2013 and January 2019. Patients with concomitant GS and staple-line leak were excluded. The primary outcome was the clinical response to treatment.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients presented with OGSs. One patient underwent urgent surgical treatment for acute migration of cardia. Of 42 patients who had evident GS, pneumatic balloon dilatation (PBD) achieved clinical success in 28 (66.7%) patients. Six patients were diagnosed with indolent GS, and four of them improved after empirical PBD. The mean interval from index surgery to PBD was 5.3 (± 4.2) months. Longer duration of PBD session was associated with better clinical outcomes (5.8 ± 3.7 vs. 3.2 ± 1.7 min) (P = 0.017). After failed PBD, endoscopic stenting (n = 2) and revisional surgery (n = 7) were performed with clinical success in all patients.

CONCLUSION

PBD using achalasia balloon is the mainstay of treatment with good clinical outcomes. The utility of endoscopic stenting for GS should be different from its use for leakage in aspects of dwelling time and required endoscopic expertise. RYGB is the gold standard revisional procedure due to the high success rate and technical familiarity. Controversial aspects of management require future prospective comparative studies.

Surgical management of achalasia

Esophageal achalasia is a primary esophageal motility disorder characterized by lack of peristalsis and by incomplete or absent relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter in response to swallowing. The cause of the disease is unknown. The goal of treatment is to eliminate the functional outflow obstruction at the level of the gastroesophageal junction, therefore allowing emptying of the esophagus into the stomach. They include the laparoscopic Heller myotomy with partial fundoplication, pneumatic dilatation, and peroral endoscopic myotomy. Esophagectomy is considered as a last resort for patients who have failed prior therapeutic attempts. In this evidence and experience-based review, we will illustrate the technique and results of the surgical treatment of esophageal achalasia and compare it to the other available treatment modalities.

2019 Seoul Consensus on Esophageal Achalasia Guidelines

Esophageal achalasia is a primary motility disorder characterized by insufficient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation and loss of esophageal peristalsis. Achalasia is a chronic disease that causes progressive irreversible loss of esophageal motor function. The recent development of high-resolution manometry has facilitated the diagnosis of achalasia, and determining the achalasia subtypes based on high-resolution manometry can be important when deciding on treatment methods. Peroral endoscopic myotomy is less invasive than surgery with comparable efficacy. The present guidelines (the "2019 Seoul Consensus on Esophageal Achalasia Guidelines") were developed based on evidence-based medicine; the Asian Neurogastroenterology and Motility Association and Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility served as the operating and development committees, respectively. The development of the guidelines began in June 2018, and a draft consensus based on the Delphi process was achieved in April 2019. The guidelines consist of 18 recommendations: 2 pertaining to the definition and epidemiology of achalasia, 6 pertaining to diagnoses, and 10 pertaining to treatments. The endoscopic treatment section is based on the latest evidence from meta-analyses. Clinicians (including gastroenterologists, upper gastrointestinal tract surgeons, general physicians, nurses, and other hospital workers) and patients could use these guidelines to make an informed decision on the management of achalasia.

Pneumatic balloon dilatation versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia: a failed attempt at meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The advent of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) shed some light on the role of the current standards in the treatment of idiopathic achalasia, namely endoscopic pneumatic dilatation (PD) and laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM). We analyzed the quality of the current evidence comparing LHM and PD.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in Pubmed/Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Cochrane for meta-analyses/systematic reviews comparing PD and LHM or open surgery, limited to English language full-text articles. After a detailed review of these meta-analyses, all studies included were analyzed further in depth with respect to treatment protocol, assessment of success, complications and sequelae such as gastroesophageal reflux (GER), as well as follow-up details.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials (RCT), 5 with LHM and 1 with open surgery, were found, published in 10 papers. In contrast to a rather homogeneous LHM technique, PD regimens as well as the clinical dysphagia scores were different in every RCT; most RCTs also showed methodological limitations. There were nine meta-analyses which included a variable number of these RCTs or other cohort studies. Meta-analyses between 2009 and 2013 favored surgery, while the 4 most recent ones reached divergent conclusions. The main difference might have been whether repeated dilatation was regarded as part of the PD protocol or as failure.

CONCLUSIONS

The variability in PD techniques and in definition of clinical success utilized in the achalasia RCTs on PD versus LHM render the conclusions of meta-analyses unreliable. Further randomized studies should be based on uniform criteria; in the meantime, publication of even more meta-analyses should be avoided.

Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy, Pneumatic Dilatation, and Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy for Esophageal Achalasia

Background: Laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM), pneumatic dilatation (PD), and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) are common treatments for esophageal achalasia. Literature evidence is restricted to pairwise analysis and PD versus POEM comparison is missing. The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to comprehensively compare outcomes within these three surgical approaches with those of esophageal achalasia. Materials and Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were consulted. A systematic review and a fully Bayesian study level arm-based random effect NMA were performed. Results: Nineteen studies (14 observational and 5 randomized controlled trial) and 4407 patients were included. Overall, 50.4% underwent LHM, 42.8% PD, and 6.8% POEM. The postoperative dysphagia remission was statistically significantly improved in POEM compared with LHM and PD (risk ratio [RR] = 1.21; 95% credible intervals [CIs] = 1.04-1.47 and RR = 1.40; 95% CIs = 1.14-1.79, respectively). Postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) rate was higher in POEM than in LHM and PD (RR = 1.75; 95% CIs = 1.35-2.03 and RR = 1.36; 95% CIs = 1.18-1.68, respectively). Postoperative Eckardt score was significantly lower in POEM than in LHM and PD (standardized mean difference (smd) = -0.6; 95% CIs = -1.4 to -0.2 and smd = -1.2; 95% CIs = -2.3 to -0.2, respectively). No statistically significant differences were found comparing LHM and PD in any of the analyzed outcomes. Conclusions: In the short-term follow-up, POEM seems to be associated with better dysphagia improvement and higher postoperative GERD than LHM and PD. The choice of the ideal initial management should be left to multidisciplinary team discussion and personalized on each patient basis.

Management of achalasia in 2019

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to discuss the efficacy, morbidity and side-effects of innovative management strategies for achalasia that include high-resolution manometry (HRM), pneumatic dilatation, laparoscopic Heller's myotomy (LHM), injection of botulinum toxin into the lower esophageal sphincter and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM).

RECENT FINDINGS

HRM has enabled identification of achalasia subtypes that have important prognostic implications. Pneumatic dilatation is a commonly-used and cost-effective method of treating achalasia but has shown poor longevity of symptom relief compared with other modalities and carries a risk of esophageal perforation. LHM is often the preferred, most effective treatment modality, however new studies may show that outcomes are equivalent or even inferior to POEM. Botulinum toxin injection of the lower esophageal sphincter has a waning and short duration of efficacy and is used primarily for patients unsuitable for more definitive invasive procedures. POEM is considered the most effective treatment for type III achalasia but carries a high risk of iatrogenic gastroesophageal reflux disease that might predispose to the development of Barrett's esophagus.

SUMMARY

HRM and POEM are two major innovations in the management of achalasia developed over the past decade. There are now three major management options for patients with achalasia, namely pneumatic dilatation, LHM and POEM. Treatment selection should be tailored to the patient's individual esophageal physiology, physical fitness and dominant symptoms.

Pneumatic dilation versus laparoscopic Heller's myotomy in the treatment of achalasia: systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials

Achalasia is a primary esophageal motor disorder with a variety of causes. It is most common in Central and South America, where Chagas disease is endemic. In addition to the infectious etiology, achalasia can be idiopathic, autoimmune, or drug induced. It is an incurable, progressive condition that destroys the intramural nerve plexus, causing aperistalsis of the esophageal body and impaired relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter. The literature on the treatment of achalasia comparing pneumatic dilation (PD) and laparoscopic Heller's myotomy (LHM) shows conflicting results. Therefore, a systemic review and meta-analysis are needed. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of PD and LHM, based on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses recommendations, was presented. The primary outcome was symptom remission based on the Eckardt score. Secondary outcomes were lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP), gastroesophageal reflux (GER), and perforation. A total of four studies were included in this analysis. The total number of patients was 404. Posttreatment symptom remission rates did not differ significantly between LHM and PD at 2 years (RD = 0.03, 95% CI [-0.05, 0.12], P = 0.62), or 5 years (RD = 0.13, 95% CI [-0.12, 0.39], P = 0.32). The posttreatment perforation rate was lower for LHM (RD = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.08, -0.01], P = 0.03). There was no significant difference in terms of LESP or GER. For the treatment of esophageal achalasia, LHM and PD were found to be similar in terms of their long-term efficacy, as well as in terms of the posttreatment GER rates. However, the perforation rate appears to be lower when LHM is employed.

Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy Versus Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM) for Achalasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcome of per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) for the treatment of esophageal achalasia.

BACKGROUND

Over the last 2 decades, LHM has become the primary form of treatment in many centers. However, since the first description of POEM in 2010, this technique has widely disseminated, despite the absence of long-term results and randomized trials.

METHODS

A systematic Medline literature search of articles on LHM and POEM for the treatment of achalasia was performed. The main outcomes measured were improvement of dysphagia and posttreatment gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Linear regression was used to model the effect of each procedure on the different outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifty-three studies reported data on LHM (5834 patients), and 21 articles examined POEM (1958 patients). Mean follow-up was significantly longer for studies of LHM (41.5 vs. 16.2 mo, P < 0.0001). Predicted probabilities for improvement in dysphagia at 12 months were 93.5% for POEM and 91.0% for LHM (P = 0.01), and at 24 months were 92.7% for POEM and 90.0% for LHM (P = 0.01). Patients undergoing POEM were more likely to develop GERD symptoms (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.33-2.14, P < 0.0001), GERD evidenced by erosive esophagitis (OR 9.31, 95% CI 4.71-18.85, P < 0.0001), and GERD evidenced by pH monitoring (OR 4.30, 95% CI 2.96-6.27, P < 0.0001). On average, length of hospital stay was 1.03 days longer after POEM (P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term results show that POEM is more effective than LHM in relieving dysphagia, but it is associated with a very high incidence of pathologic reflux.

Esophageal achalasia: current diagnosis and treatment

Esophageal achalasia is a primary esophageal motility disorder of unknown origin, characterized by lack of peristalsis and by incomplete or absent relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter in response to swallowing. The goal of treatment is to eliminate the functional obstruction at the level of the gastroesophageal junction. Areas covered: This comprehensive review will evaluate the current literature, illustrating the diagnostic evaluation and providing an evidence-based treatment algorithm for this disease. Expert commentary: Today, we have three very effective therapeutic modalities to treat patients with achalasia - pneumatic dilatation, peroral endoscopic myotomy, and laparoscopic Heller myotomy with fundoplication. Treatment should be tailored to the individual patient, in centers where a multidisciplinary approach is available. Esophageal resection should be considered as a last resort for patients who have failed prior therapeutic attempts.

Results of pneumatic dilation in treating achalasia: predictive factors

Forced pneumatic dilatation (PD) of the cardia is one of the most consecrated therapeutic measures for esophageal achalasia. The procedure only achieved better standardization with the appearance of the Rigiflex balloon. Results and predictive factors of success and failure of PD are reviewed, right after the description of the main technical aspects of the procedure. The success rates, providing control of dysphagia for about 1 year from the procedure using the Rigiflex balloon, are quite satisfactory, with success in more than 75% of patients. It is generally observed that good responses sustained for more than 5 years appear in at least 40% of cases. However, approximately half of the patients submitted to PD require additional dilation and a subgroup of them will undergo surgical treatment to attain adequate control of dysphagia. PD is a method with a low rate of acute complications, with esophageal perforation, the most severe of them, not affecting more than 5% of the cases. The best results could be potentially obtained when predictive factors of success were considered before choosing PD as a therapeutic option, but prospective studies in this field are missing until now.

GERD after per-oral endoscopic myotomy as compared with Heller's myotomy with fundoplication: a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) represents a less invasive alternative to conventional laparoscopic Heller's myotomy (LHM) for patients with achalasia. It cannot be excluded, however, that the lack of fundoplication after POEM may result in a higher incidence of reflux disease, as compared with LHM. The aim of our study was to conduct a systematic review of prospective studies reporting the incidence of reflux disease developed after POEM and LHM.

METHODS

A literature search with electronic databases was performed (up to February 2017) to identify full articles on the incidence of gastroesophageal reflux symptoms and endoscopic monitoring and pH monitoring findings after POEM and LHM (with fundoplication). Proportions and rates were pooled by means of random or fixed-effects models, according to the level of heterogeneity between studies.

RESULTS

After we applied the selection criteria, 17 and 28 studies, including 1542 and 2581 participants who underwent POEM and LHM, respectively, were included. The pooled rate of postprocedural symptoms was 19.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15.7%-22.8%) after POEM and 8.8% (95% CI, 5.3%-14.1%) after LHM, respectively. The pooled rate estimate of abnormal acid exposure at pH monitoring was 39.0% (95% CI, 24.5%-55.8%) after POEM and 16.8% (95% CI, 10.2%-26.4%) after LHM, respectively. The rate of esophagitis after POEM was 29.4% (95% CI, 18.5%-43.3%) after POEM and 7.6% (95% CI, 4.1%-13.7%) after LHM. At meta-regression, heterogeneity was explained partly by the POEM approach and study population.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of reflux disease appears to be significantly more frequent after POEM than after LHM with fundoplication. Monitoring pH and ensuring appropriate treatment after POEM should be considered in order to prevent long-term reflux-related adverse events.

Clinical management of pediatric achalasia

Achalasia is a rare esophageal motility disorder. Much of the literature is based on the adult population. In adults, guidance of therapeutic approach by manometric findings has led to improvement in patient outcome. Promising results have been achieved with novel therapies such as PerOral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM). Areas covered: In this review, we provide an overview of the novel diagnostic and therapeutic tools for achalasia management and in what way they will relate to the future management of pediatric achalasia. We performed a PubMed and EMBASE search of English literature on achalasia using the keywords 'children', 'achalasia', 'pneumatic dilation', 'myotomy' and 'POEM'. Cohort studies < 10 cases and studies describing patients ≥ 20 years were excluded. Data regarding patient characteristics, treatment outcome and adverse events were extracted and presented descriptively, or pooled when possible. Expert commentary: Available data report that pneumatic dilation and laparoscopic Heller's myotomy are effective in children, with certain studies suggesting lower success rates in pneumatic dilation. POEM is increasingly used in the pediatric setting with promising short-term results. Gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) may occur post-achalasia intervention due to disruption of the LES and therefore requires diligent follow-up, especially in children treated with POEM.

Endoscopic Pneumatic Dilation for Esophageal Achalasia

Pneumatic dilation is a well-established treatment modality that has withstood the test of time. Prospective and randomized trials have shown that in expert hands, it provides results similar to a laparoscopic Heller myotomy with fundoplication. In addition, it should be considered the primary form of treatment in patients who experience recurrence of symptoms after a surgical myotomy.

An Update on Current Management Strategies for Achalasia and Future Perspectives

The last decade has seen growing insight into the pathophysiology of achalasia, and current treatments decreasing the resting pressure in the lower esophageal sphincter by endoscopic (botulinum toxin injection, pneumatic dilation, peroral endoscopic myotomy) or surgical means (Heller myotomy). Manometry is considered the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis of achalasia. Pneumatic dilation and laparoscopic Heller myotomy have similar effectiveness and are both more successful in patients with type II achalasia. Laparoscopic myotomy when combined with partial fundoplication is an effective surgical technique and has been considered the operative procedure of choice until recently. Peroral endoscopic myotomy is an emerging therapy with promising results since it offers a minimally invasive and efficacious option especially in type III achalasia. However, it remains to be determined if peroral endoscopic myotomy offers long-term efficacy.

Population-based cohort study of surgical myotomy and pneumatic dilatation as primary interventions for oesophageal achalasia

Background

The aim of this national population-based cohort study was to compare rates of reintervention after surgical myotomy versus sequential pneumatic dilatation for the primary management of oesophageal achalasia.

Methods

Patients with oesophageal achalasia diagnosed between 2002 and 2012, and without an intervention in the preceding 5 years were identified from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. Patients were divided into two groups based on the primary treatment, and propensity score matching was used to compensate for differences in baseline characteristics.

Results

Some 14 705 patients were diagnosed with oesophageal achalasia, of whom 7487 (50·9 per cent) received interventional treatment: 1742 (23·3 per cent) surgical myotomy, 4534 (60·6 per cent) pneumatic dilatation and 1211 (16·2 per cent) endoscopic botulinum toxin injection. As age increased, the proportion of patients receiving myotomy decreased and the proportion undergoing dilatation increased. Patients who underwent surgical myotomy were younger (mean age 44·8 years versus 58·5 years among those who had pneumatic dilatation; P &lt; 0·001), a greater proportion had a Charlson co-morbidity index score of 0 (90·1 versus 87·7 per cent; P = 0·003) and they were more commonly men (55·6 versus 51·8 per cent; P = 0·020). Following propensity score matching, the safety of the two initial treatment approaches was equivalent, with no difference in incidence of oesophageal perforation (1·3 and 1·4 per cent after myotomy and dilatation respectively; P = 0·750). However, dilatation was associated with increased need for reintervention (59·6 versus 13·8 per cent; P &lt; 0·001) and frequency of reinterventions (mean 0·34 versus 0·06 per year; P &lt; 0·001).

Conclusion

Surgical myotomy was associated with a lower rate of reintervention and could be offered as primary treatment in patients with oesophageal achalasia who are fit for surgery. For those unfit for surgery, pneumatic dilatation may provide symptomatic relief with approximately 60 per cent of patients requiring reintervention.

Laparoscopic esophageal myotomy versus pneumatic dilation in the treatment of idiopathic achalasia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Achalasia is a primary esophageal motility disorder of unknown etiology associated with abnormalities in peristalsis and lower esophageal sphincter relaxation. The disease is incurable; however, definitive treatment procedures like pneumatic dilation (PD)/balloon dilation and laparoscopic esophageal myotomy (LEM) are performed to relieve dysphagia and related symptoms. Currently, there is paucity of data comparing the outcomes of these procedures. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the short- and long-term success rates of PD and LEM.

METHODS

A thorough systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane library was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the outcomes of PD versus LEM in the treatment of achalasia. The Mantel-Haenszel method and random effect model were used to analyze the data. RCTs with outcome data at 3-month, 1-year, and 5-year intervals were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 437,378 and 254 patients at 3-month, 1-year, and 5-year intervals were analyzed for outcome data. At 3 months and 1 year, PD was not as effective as LEM (odds ratio [OR]: 0.50; confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.82; P = 0.009 and OR: 0.47; CI 0.22-0.99; P = 0.21) but at 5 years, one procedure was non-inferior to the other (OR: 0.62; 0.33-1.19; P = 0.34).

CONCLUSION

PD was as effective as LEM in relieving symptoms of achalasia in the long-term.

Laparoscopic Heller myotomy is not superior to pneumatic dilation in the management of primary achalasia: Conclusions of a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Achalasia is an esophageal motility disorder, of unknown cause, which results in increased lower esophageal sphincter tone and symptoms of difficulty swallowing. Current major therapeutic options include laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) and pneumatic dilation (PD). We undertake a systematic review comparing the efficacy and safety of these 2 treatments in the treatment of esophageal achalasia.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized controlled trial investigating LHM versus PD in the treatment of primary achalasia. The primary outcome was symptom remission rates. The Mantel-Haenszel method with fixed-effect or random-effects model was used to calculate relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Five studies involving 498 participants were included. The cumulative remission rate was significantly higher with LHM at 3 months and 1 year (short-term), with a risk ratio of 1.16 (95% CI 1.01-1.35, P = 0.04) and 1.14 (95% CI 1.02-1.27, P = 0.02), respectively. There were no significant differences between LHM and PD in 2-year and 5-year remission rate (long-term), with a risk ratio of 1.05 (95% CI 0.91-1.22, P = 0.49) and 1.17 (95% CI 0.84-1.64, P = 0.34), respectively. Rates of major mucosal tears requiring subsequent intervention with LHM were significantly lower than those of esophageal perforation with PD requiring postprocedural medical or surgical therapy, with a risk ratio of 0.25 (95% CI 0.08-0.81, P = 0.02). Postprocedural rates of gastroesophageal reflux, lower esophageal sphincter pressures, and quality of life scores did not differ in trials with sufficient data.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences between LHM and PD in 2-year and 5-year remission rate. This study indicates that either treatment can be proposed as initial treatment for achalasia.

Achalasia: Outcome in children

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal achalasia is well-recognized but relatively rare in children, occasionally appearing as the "triple A" syndrome (with adrenal insufficiency and alacrima). Treatment modalities, as in adult practice, are not curative, often needing further interventions and spurring the search for better management. The outcome for syndromic variants is unknown. We sought to define the efficacy of treatments for children with achalasia with and without triple A syndrome.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of presentation and outcomes for 42 children with achalasia presenting over three decades to a major pediatric referral center. Long term impact of the diagnosis was assessed by questionnaire.

RESULTS

We identified 42 children including six with triple A syndrome. The median overall age at diagnosis was 10.8 years and median follow-up 1593 days. Initial Heller myotomy in 17 required further interventions in 11 (65%), while initial treatment with botulinum toxin (n = 20) was ultimately followed by myotomy in 17 (85%). Ten out of 35 patients who underwent myotomy required a repeat myotomy (29%). Patients with triple A syndrome developed symptoms earlier, but had delayed diagnosis, were more underweight at diagnosis and at last follow up. Questionnaire results suggested a significant long term deleterious impact on the quality of life of children and their families.

CONCLUSION

Many children with achalasia relapse after initial treatment, undergoing multiple, different procedures, despite which symptoms persist and impact on quality of life. Symptoms develop earlier in patients with triple A syndrome, but the diagnosis is delayed and this has substantial nutritional impact.

Update on the endoscopic treatments for achalasia

Achalasia is the most common primary motility disorder of the esophagus and presents as dysphagia to solids and liquids. It is characterized by impaired deglutitive relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter. High-resolution manometry allows for definitive diagnosis and classification of achalasia, with type II being the most responsive to therapy. Since no cure for achalasia exists, early diagnosis and treatment of the disease is critical to prevent end-stage disease. The central tenant of diagnosis is to first rule out mechanical obstruction due to stricture or malignancy, which is often accomplished by endoscopic and fluoroscopic examination. Therapeutic options include pneumatic dilation (PD), surgical myotomy, and endoscopic injection of botulinum toxin injection. Heller myotomy and PD are more efficacious than pharmacologic therapies and should be considered first-line treatment options. Per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a minimally-invasive endoscopic therapy that might be as effective as surgical myotomy when performed by a trained and experienced endoscopist, although long-term data are lacking. Overall, therapy should be individualized to each patient's clinical situation and based upon his or her risk tolerance, operative candidacy, and life expectancy. In instances of therapeutic failure or symptom recurrence re-treatment is possible and can include PD or POEM of the wall opposite the site of prior myotomy. Patients undergoing therapy for achalasia require counseling, as the goal of therapy is to improve swallowing and prevent late manifestations of the disease rather than to restore normal swallowing, which is unfortunately impossible.