TY - JOUR
T1 - Peroral endoscopic myotomy (poem) vs pneumatic dilation (pd) in treatment of Achalasia
T2 - A meta-analysis of studies with ≥ 12-month follow-up
AU - Ofosu, Andrew
AU - Mohan, Babu P.
AU - Ichkhanian, Yervant
AU - Masadeh, Maen
AU - Febin, John
AU - Barakat, Mohamed
AU - Ramai, Daryl
AU - Chandan, Saurabh
AU - Haiyeva, Gulara
AU - Khan, Shahab R.
AU - Meybodi, Mohamad Aghaie
AU - Facciorusso, Antonio
AU - Repici, Alessandro
AU - Wani, Sachin
AU - Thosani, Nirav
AU - Khashab, Mouen A.
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr. Thosani is a consultant for Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Endogastric Solutions, and Pentax of America; a speaker for Abbvie, and receives royalties from UpToDate. Dr. Khashab is a consultant for Boston Scientific, Medtronic and Olympus. Dr. Repici receives consulting fees, speaker fees, and research grants from Boston Scientific; is an advisory board speaker for Fujifilm; receives an advisory board consulting fee from ERBE; is on the EndoKey advisory board; is on the En-doStart advisory board; and is on the advisory board for and receives research grants and consulting fees from Medtronic. Dr. Wani is a Consultant for Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Cernostics, and Inter-pace. This work was supported by the University of Colorado Department of Medicine Outstanding Early Scholars Program.
Publisher Copyright:
©. 2021. The Author(s).
PY - 2021/7/1
Y1 - 2021/7/1
N2 - 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).
AB - 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).
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85108853194
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85108853194#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1055/a-1483-9406
DO - 10.1055/a-1483-9406
M3 - Article
C2 - 34222636
AN - SCOPUS:85108853194
SN - 2364-3722
VL - 9
SP - E1097-E1107
JO - Endoscopy International Open
JF - Endoscopy International Open
IS - 7
ER -