How does per-oral endoscopic myotomy compare to Heller myotomy? The Latin American perspective

Abstract

Background and study aims Both Heller myotomy (HM) and per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) are efficacious therapies for achalasia. The efficacy and safety of POEM vs HM in Latin America and specifically in patients with Chagas disease is unknown.

Patients and methods Consecutive patients undergoing either HM or POEM for achalasia were included from nine Latin American centers in a prospective registry over 5 years. Technical success was defined as undergoing a successful myotomy. Clinical success was defined as achieving an Eckardt score < 3. Data on demographics, procedure info, Eckardt score, and adverse events (AEs) were collected. Student’s t test, Chi squared, and logistic regression analyses were conducted.

Results One hundred thirty-three patients were included (59 male; 44 %; mean age 47). POEM was performed in 69 patients, HM in 64 patients. A total of 35 patients had Chagas disease, 17 of 69 in the POEM group, 18 of 64 in the HM group. Both groups had significant reduction in Eckardt scores (P < 0.00001), but successful initial therapy was significantly higher in the POEM group compared to the HM group (P = 0.01304). AEs were similar in both group (17 % vs 14 %) and consisted of pneumothorax (n = 3 vs 2), bleeding requiring transfusion (n = 3 vs 2), and mediastinitis (n = 3 vs 1). Hospital stay was longer in the HM group than in the POEM group (P < 0.00001). In the Chagas subgroup, post-procedure Eckardt score in the POEM group was significantly reduced by 5.71 points (P < 0.00001) versus 1.56 points in the HM group (P = 0.042793).

Conclusion Both HM and POEM are efficacious for achalasia, but POEM was associated with higher initial therapy success and shorter hospital stay in Latin America. In Chagas patients with achalasia, POEM was significantly more effective than HM.

Publication History

Received: 18 November 2019

Accepted: 12 June 2020

Article published online:
22 September 2020

• References

• 1 World Health Organization. Chagas Disease Key Facts. http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/chagas-disease-(american-trypanosomiasis)
• 2 Roure S, Valerio L, Vallès X. et al. Oesophageal motility disorders in infected immigrants with Chagas disease in a non-endemic European area. United European Gastroenterol J 2016; 4: 614-620
• 3 Conners EE, Vinetz JM, Weeks JR. et al. A global systematic review of Chagas disease prevalence among migrants. Acta Trop 2016; 156: 68-78
• 4 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Travelers‘ Health. Chagas Disease (American Trypanosomiasis). https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/diseases/chagas-disease-american-trypanosomiasis
• 5 Bargiggia G, Ruggeri M, Ortalli G. et al. Congenital Chagas disease in a Bolivian newborn in Bergamo (Italy). Infez Med 2018; 26: 93-96
• 6 Jackson Y, de Mello Pula DV, Finckh A. et al. Chagas disease and systemic autoimmune diseases among Bolivian patients in Switzerland. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 2018; 113: e170383
• 7 Dos Santos CM, de Cassiani AR, do Nascimento WV. et al. Timing of pharyngeal swallow events in Chagas’ disease. Gastroenterol Res 2014; 7: 93-97
• 8 Vicentine FPP, Herbella FAM, Allaix ME. et al. Comparison of idiopathic achalasia and Chagas’ disease esophagopathy at the light of high-resolution manometry. Dis Esophagus 2014; 27: 128-133
• 9 Goldstein AM, Thapar N, Karunaratne TB. et al. Clinical aspects of neurointestinal disease: Pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Dev Biol 2016; 417: 217-228
• 10 Sánchez-Montalvá A, Moris M, Mego M. et al. High Resolution esophageal manometry in patients with chagas disease: a cross-sectional evaluation. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2016; 10: e0004416
• 11 Arora Z, Thota PN, Sanaka MR. Achalasia: current therapeutic options. Ther Adv Chronic Dis 2017; 8: 101-108
• 12 Pantanali CAR, Herbella FAM, Henry MA. et al. Laparoscopic Heller myotomy and fundoplication in patients with Chagas’ disease achalasia and massively dilated esophagus. Am Surg 2013; 79: 72-75
• 13 Schlottmann F, Allaix ME, Patti MG. Laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia technical aspects. Am Surg 2018; 84: 477-480
• 14 Friscia ME, Buyske J. Laparoscopic Nissen Fundoplication and Heller myotomy. G Gloved Surg Introd to Common Proced 2009; 44-54
• 15 Grimes KL, Inoue H. Per oral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia: a detailed description of the technique and review of the literature. Thorac Surg Clin 2016; 26: 147-162
• 16 Inoue H, Sato H, Ikeda H. et al. Per-Oral endoscopic myotomy: a series of 500 patients. J Am Coll Surg 2015; 221: 256-264
• 17 Cho YK, Kim SH. Current status of peroral endoscopic myotomy. Clin Endosc 2018; 51: 13-18
• 18 Torres-Villalobos G, Martin-Del-Campo LA. Surgical treatment for achalasia of the esophagus: laparoscopic heller myotomy. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2013; 2013: 708327
• 19 Illés A, Farkas N, Hegyi P. et al. Is Heller myotomy better than balloon dilation? A meta-analysis. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2017; 26: 121-127
• 20 Smith SP, Louie BE. The current state of per oral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia. J Vis Surg 2017; 3: 122
• 21 Kumbhari V, Tieu AH, Onimaru M. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) vs laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) for the treatment of Type III achalasia in 75 patients: a multicenter comparative study. Endosc Int Open 2015; 3: E195-E201
• 22 Bhayani NH, Kurian AA, Dunst CM. et al. A Comparative study on comprehensive, objective outcomes of laparoscopic Heller myotomy with per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia. Ann Surg 2014; 259: 1098-1103
• 23 Zhang Y, Wang H, Chen X. et al. Per-oral endoscopic myotomy versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia: a meta-analysis of nonrandomized comparative studies. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016; 95: e2736
• 24 Schlottmann F, Luckett DJ, Fine J. et al. Laparoscopic Heller myotomy versus peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia. Ann Surg 2017; 267: 1
• 25 Estremera-Arévalo F, Albéniz E, Rullán M. et al. Efficacy of peroral endoscopic myotomy compared with other invasive treatment options for the different esophageal motor disorders. Rev Esp Enfermedades Dig 2017; 109: 578-586
• 26 Khashab MA, Kumbhari V, Tieu AH. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy achieves similar clinical response but incurs lesser charges compared to robotic heller myotomy. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2017; 23: 91-96
• 27 Ward MA, Gitelis M, Patel L. et al. Outcomes in patients with over 1-year follow-up after peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). Surg Endosc 2017; 31: 1550-1557
• 28 Peng L, Tian S, Du C. et al. Outcome of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for Treating achalasia compared with laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM). Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2017; 27: 60-64
• 29 Docimo S, Mathew A, Shope AJ. et al. Reduced postoperative pain scores and narcotic use favor per-oral endoscopic myotomy over laparoscopic Heller myotomy. Surg Endosc 2017; 31: 795-800
• 30 Dawod E, Saumoy M, Xu M-M. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in jackhammer esophagus: a trick of the trade. Endoscopy 2017; 49: E254-E255
• 31 Tyberg A, Sharaiha RZ, Familiari P. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy as salvation technique post-Heller: International experience. Dig Endosc 2018; 30: 52-56
• 32 Hungness ES, Sternbach JM, Teitelbaum EN. et al. Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) after the learning curve. Ann Surg 2016; 264: 508-517
• 33 Alves APR, de Oliveira PG, de Oliveira JM. et al. Long-term results of the Modified Thal procedure in patients with chagasic megaesophagus. World J Surg 2014; 38: 1425-1430