Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Laparoscopic pyloroplasty versus endoscopic per-oral pyloromyotomy for the treatment of gastroparesis.
Landreneau, Joshua P; Strong, Andrew T; El-Hayek, Kevin; Tu, Chao; Villamere, James; Ponsky, Jeffrey L; Kroh, Matthew D; Rodriguez, John H.
Affiliation
  • Landreneau JP; Department of General Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. landrej@ccf.org.
  • Strong AT; Department of General Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • El-Hayek K; Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • Tu C; Department of General Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • Villamere J; Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • Ponsky JL; Cleveland Clinic Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • Kroh MD; Department of General Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • Rodriguez JH; Department of General Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Surg Endosc ; 33(3): 773-781, 2019 03.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30019220
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Gastroparesis is a debilitating functional disorder of the stomach characterized by delayed gastric emptying absent an obstructive etiology. Surgical or endoscopic disruption of the pylorus has been utilized to treat this disease, but there is little evidence comparing laparoscopic pyloroplasty (LP) with endoscopic per-oral pyloromyotomy (POP). Herein we describe our experience at our institution using a propensity-matched cohort study to compare outcomes between these procedures.

METHODS:

All patients who underwent LP for the treatment of gastroparesis from October 2014 through September 2017 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity scoring was used to match these patients 11 to patients undergoing POP during this time period based on gender, age, and etiology of gastroparesis. Symptom scores using the Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI), scintigraphic gastric emptying studies (GES), and perioperative outcomes were compared between matched cohorts. Thirty patients underwent LP for gastroparesis during the study period which were matched 11 with patients undergoing POP. The etiology of gastroparesis was 63.3% idiopathic (n = 19), 20.0% post-surgical (n = 6), and 16.7% diabetic (n = 5) in both cohorts.

RESULTS:

Patients who underwent LP had a longer average length of stay (4.6 vs. 1.4 days, p = 0.003), operative time (99.3 vs. 33.9 min, p < 0.001), and estimated blood loss (12.9 vs. 0.4 mL, p < 0.001). There were more complications in the LP cohort (16.7 vs. 3.3%, p = 0.086), which included surgical site infection (6.7 vs. 0%, p = 0.153), pneumonia (6.7 vs. 0.0%, p = 0.153), and unplanned ICU admission (10.0 vs. 0.0%, p = 0.078). LP and POP both resulted in similar, significant improvements in both in GCSI scores and objective gastric emptying.

CONCLUSIONS:

Per-oral endoscopic pyloromyotomy (POP) is safe and effective for the treatment of medical refractory gastroparesis. POP has less perioperative morbidity compared to LP with comparative functional outcomes.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pylorus / Laparoscopy / Gastroparesis / Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery / Pyloromyotomy Type of study: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Year: 2019 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pylorus / Laparoscopy / Gastroparesis / Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery / Pyloromyotomy Type of study: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Year: 2019 Type: Article