Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Surgical Management of Esophageal Achalasia in Pediatrics: A Systematic Review.
Goneidy, Ayman; Cory-Wright, James; Zhu, Limeng; Malakounides, Georgina.
Afiliação
  • Goneidy A; Department of Paediatric Surgery, Royal Manchester Children's Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom.
  • Cory-Wright J; School of Medicine, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
  • Zhu L; School of Medicine, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
  • Malakounides G; Department of Paediatric Surgery, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Eur J Pediatr Surg ; 30(1): 13-20, 2020 Feb.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31600801
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

There are no evidence-based guidelines on the surgical management of esophageal achalasia (OA) in children. This can be a challenging condition with significant physical and psychological morbidity. Our aim was to identify the most common management modalities and their outcomes. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

A systematic review was performed through a literature search of health care databases in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, aiming at identifying pediatric series discussing the diagnosis and management of OA. Duplicates, case series with < 9 patients, and follow-up of < 1 year were excluded. The included papers were analyzed for diagnostic methods, primary treatment method, complications, follow-up duration, outcome measures recorded, and outcome.

RESULTS:

Data from 33 papers for 742 children treated for OA was analyzed. Eleven mentioned multiple management modalities. In summary, 25 described Heller's esophagomyotomy (HM), 13 esophageal dilatation (EOD), and 6 peroral esophageal myotomy (POEM). Mean follow-up was 43.7 months (12-180). Outcome measures were heterogeneous. However, analysis of reported success showed a mean success of 78% for HM (p = 1.79 × 10-7), 44.9% for EOD (p = 0.24), and 99.3% for POEM (p = 0.001). Reported complications were 12.8% for HM, 5% for EOD, and 24.4% for POEM. Further interventions were required for 10.9% of HM, 62.3% of EOD, and 0.01% of POEM patient groups.

CONCLUSION:

Methods of diagnosis and measures of successful outcomes were heterogeneous, limiting the strength of evidence. HM showed superior short-term success rates to EOD. POEM is a promising modality but requires investment in equipment and training. Information about sustainability of response and long-term outcomes is lacking.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Acalasia Esofágica Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Acalasia Esofágica Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article