Objectives: Selective circular myotomy (CM) is recommended in peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia, but completeness of myotmoy is the prerequisite for excellent long-term results of conventional surgical myotomy. The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy and safety between peroral endoscopic full-thickness and simple CM for the treatment of severe achalasia.
Materials and methods: A total of 123 severe achalasia patients who underwent POEM from August 2011 to May 2013 were included. They were divided into circular or full-thickness myotomy (FTM) groups according to the depth of myotomy. Demographics, Eckardt score, procedure-related parameters, perioperative adverse events, pre- and postoperative esophageal diameter, esophageal manometry, and follow-up results were retrospectively collected and compared between the two groups.
Results: All the 123 patients underwent POEM successfully, and the mean operation time was significantly shorter in FTM group compared with CM group (57.4 ± 8.2 minutes versus 63.2 ± 12.3 minutes, P < .05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of treatment success, pre- and postoperative Eckardt score, esophageal diameter, esophageal manometry, and perioperative adverse events (P > .05). Twenty-four-hour pH monitoring was performed in 19 patients (11 in FTM, 8 in CM). Although no statistical difference was detected in rate of abnormal esophageal acid exposure between groups, this rate was higher in FTM group than CM group (60% versus 40%, P > .05).
Conclusion: Treatment efficacy in short-to-medium term are comparable between circular or FTM. FTM significantly reduce the operative duration, but it may increase potential risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease incidence.
Keywords: esophagus/reflux; technical; thoracic.