Achalasia Treatment. Robotic Approach or Laparoscopy?

Background: Nowadays the question persists whether to choose the endoscopic or surgical method as the first treatment of choice for achalasia. Another debate topic is about the differences between the outcomes of the two approaches of minimally invasive surgical treatment and their feasibility. Material and Methods: This retrospective observational study included 193 patients with achalasia treated between 2008 and 2021. The patients were divided into 2 groups (A and B): 152 with minimally invasive heller myotomy (HM), and 41 with pneumatic dilation (PD). Patients surgically treated were then subdivided into robotic group (RG) and laparoscopic group (LG). Results: The recurrence rate was significantly higher in PD group (Ã?2 = 16.81, DF = 1, p 0.0001), with a success rate of 63,4%, comparing with 92,7% in HM group. No significant difference was obtained between the 2 groups concerning symptom relief on patients successfully treated. The success rate was comparable between the robotic and laparoscopic groups (p = 1). Significant difference was obtained in length of hospital stay between the 2 groups, with a mean of 4.78 +-1.59 days in the RG and, respectively, 5.52 +-2.1 days in the LG (t = 2.40, DF = 124.34, p = 0.0177). Postprocedural esophagitis rates were higher in patients with no fundoplication (6 out of 37 - 16.2%) and in patients treated with pneumatic dilation (4 out of 26 - 15.4%) than in patients with fundoplication (4 out of 46 - 8.5%). Conclusion: The present study indicates that surgery may be a better choice in fit patients for the treatment of achalasia. The procedure has a better success rate, even if the long-term outcomes are comparable in patients successfully treated. The success rate and long-term results were comparable between laparoscopy and robotic surgery.

Functional bowel disorders with diarrhoea: Clinical guidelines of the United European Gastroenterology and European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility.

Irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhoea (IBS-D) and functional diarrhoea (FDr) are the two major functional bowel disorders characterized by diarrhoea. In spite of their high prevalence, IBS-D and FDr are associated with major uncertainties, especially regarding their optimal diagnostic work-up and management. A Delphi consensus was performed with experts from 10 European countries who conducted a literature summary and voting process on 31 statements. Quality of evidence was evaluated using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation criteria. Consensus (defined as >80% agreement) was reached for all the statements. The panel agreed with the potential overlapping of IBS-D and FDr. In terms of diagnosis, the consensus supports a symptom-based approach also with the exclusion of alarm symptoms, recommending the evaluation of full blood count, C-reactive protein, serology for coeliac disease, and faecal calprotectin, and consideration of diagnosing bile acid diarrhoea. Colonoscopy with random biopsies in both the right and left colon is recommended in patients older than 50 years and in presence of alarm features. Regarding treatment, a strong consensus was achieved for the use of a diet low fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides and polyols, gut-directed psychological therapies, rifaximin, loperamide, and eluxadoline. A weak or conditional recommendation was achieved for antispasmodics, probiotics, tryciclic antidepressants, bile acid sequestrants, 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 antagonists (i.e. alosetron, ondansetron, or ramosetron). A multinational group of European experts summarized the current state of consensus on the definition, diagnosis, and management of IBS-D and FDr.