Medical management of painful achalasia: a patient-driven systematic review.

Achalasia is a rare esophageal disorder characterized by abnormal esophageal motility and swallowing difficulties. Pain and/or spasms often persist or recur despite effective relief of the obstruction. A survey by UK charity 'Achalasia Action' highlighted treatments for achalasia pain/spasms as a key research priority. In this patient-requested systematic review, we assessed the existing literature on pharmacological therapies for painful achalasia. A systematic review of the literature using Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed to identify studies evaluating pharmacological therapies for achalasia. Methodological quality of included randomized controlled trials was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. In total, 70% (40/57) of survey respondents reported experiencing pain/spasms. A range of management strategies were reported. Thirteen studies were included in the review. Seven were randomized controlled trials. Most studies were >30 years old, had limited follow-up, and focussed on esophageal manometry as the key endpoint. Generally, studies found improvements in lower esophageal pressures with medications. Only one study evaluated pain/spasm specifically, precluding meta-analysis. Overall risk of bias was high. The achalasia patient survey identified that pain/spasms are common and difficult to treat. This patient-requested review identified a gap in the literature regarding pharmacological treatments for these symptoms. We provide an algorithm for investigating achalasia-related pain/spasms. Calcium channel blockers or nitrates may be helpful when esophageal obstruction and reflux have been excluded. We advocate for registry-based clinical trials to expand the evidence base for these patients.

Analysis of a streamlined pathway for aortic surveillance for Turner syndrome in a single centre.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The risk of aortic dissection (AoD) is increased in women with Turner syndrome (TS) but predicting those with this heightened risk is difficult. In response to this, we sought to create a pathway to monitor TS patients to improve efficiency and resource utilisation in our dedicated TS clinic, and to monitor more closely those women thought to be at increased risk of AoD. DESIGN AND PATIENTS: Our pathway was designed based on evidence derived from International Guidelines for the management of aortic disease in women with TS. Women were divided according to those with known risk factors for AoD, and those with no known risk factors. These groups were further subdivided into 4 pathways depending on ascending aortic size which in-turn determined the frequency of outpatient appointments and imaging. RESULTS: Out of the 168 patients included in the analysis, 7 have had ascending aorta replacements, all in the highest risk group. Of the remaining 4 patients in the highest risk groups: 1 dissected whilst awaiting planned aortic surgery, 1 is currently awaiting surgery, 1 has low body mass index, therefore, making her aorta proportionally larger but not necessitating surgery and one has declined surgery. No women changed pathways. CONCLUSION: The risk-stratified pathway safely allowed consolidation of resources to women perceived to be at highest risk of AoD (excluding pregnancy), supporting the efficacy of the pathway and allowing the diversion of resources to those most at risk of AoD.