Efficacy and Safety of Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy for Treatment of Achalasia After Failed Heller Myotomy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In patients with persistent symptoms after Heller myotomy (HM), treatment options include repeat HM, pneumatic dilation, or peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of POEM in patients with achalasia with prior HM vs without prior HM. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 180 patients with achalasia who underwent POEM at 13 tertiary centers worldwide, from December 2009 through September 2015. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those with prior HM (HM group, exposure; n = 90) and those without prior HM (non-HM group; n = 90). Clinical response was defined by a decrease in Eckardt scores to 3 or less. Adverse events were graded according to criteria set by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Technical success, clinical success, and rates of adverse events were compared between groups. Patients were followed up for a median of 8.5 months. RESULTS: POEM was technically successful in 98% of patients in the HM group and in 100% of patients in the non-HM group (P = .49). A significantly lower proportion of patients in the HM group had a clinical response to POEM (81%) than in the non-HM group (94%; P = .01). There were no significant differences in rates of adverse events between the groups (8% in the HM group vs 13% in the non-HM group; P = .23). Symptomatic reflux and reflux esophagitis after POEM were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: POEM is safe and effective for patients with achalasia who were not treated successfully by prior HM. Although the rate of clinical success in patients with prior HM is lower than in those without prior HM, the safety profile of POEM is comparable between groups.

Comprehensive Analysis of Adverse Events Associated With Per Oral Endoscopic Myotomy in 1826 Patients: An International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVES: The safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is still debated since comprehensive analysis of adverse events (AEs) associated with the procedure in large multicenter cohort studies has not been performed. To study (1) the prevalence of AEs and (2) factors associated with occurrence of AEs in patients undergoing POEM. METHODS: Patients who underwent POEM at 12 tertiary-care centers between 2009 and 2015 were included in this case-control study. Cases were defined by the occurrence of any AE related to the POEM procedure. Control patients were selected for each AE case by matching for age, gender, and disease classification (achalasia type I and II vs. type III/spastic esophageal disorders). RESULTS: A total of 1,826 patients underwent POEM. Overall, 156 AEs occurred in 137 patients (7.5%). A total of 51 (2.8%) inadvertent mucosotomies occurred. Mild, moderate, and severe AEs had a frequency of 116 (6.4%), 31 (1.7%), and 9 (0.5%), respectively. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that sigmoid-type esophagus (odds ratio (OR) 2.28, P=0.05), endoscopist experience <20 cases (OR 1.98, P=0.04), use of a triangular tip knife (OR 3.22, P=0.05), and use of an electrosurgical current different than spray coagulation (OR 3.09, P=0.02) were significantly associated with the occurrence of AEs. CONCLUSIONS: This large study comprehensively assessed the safety of POEM and highly suggests POEM as a relatively safe procedure when performed by experts at tertiary centers with an overall 7.5% prevalence of AEs. Severe AEs are rare. Sigmoid-type esophagus, endoscopist experience, type of knife, and current used can be considered as predictive factors of AE occurrence.

Outcomes following 50 consecutive endoscopic gastrojejunal revisions for weight gain following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a comparison of endoscopic suturing techniques for stoma reduction.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20-30 % of morbidly obese patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) will experience significant weight regain in the years following surgery. Endoscopic gastrojejunal revision (EGJR) has been shown to be a safe, effective and less invasive alternative to revisional surgery, with promising weight loss outcomes. However, minimal data exist regarding how to perform the procedure most effectively and what factors may predict good outcomes. We compared weight loss outcomes between patients undergoing endoscopic stoma revision by one of two full-thickness suturing techniques. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing EGJR between 06/2012 and 09/2015 was performed. Included patients were adults 18-74 years of age who had experienced weight regain ≥2 years after initial RYGB with stoma dilation ≥15 mm in diameter. Revision was done with either an interrupted (IRT) or purse-string (PST) suture technique. A linear mixed effects model was constructed to predict postoperative weight loss. RESULTS: Fifty revisions (IRT = 36, PST = 14) were performed in 47 patients (92 % female, mean age of 50.9 ± 10.9 years and body mass index of 41.4 ± 7.1 kg/m2). Technical success (stoma diameter ≤10 mm) was achieved in all cases. Final diameter was significantly smaller in the PST group, 6.6 ± 2.2 mm versus 4.8 ± 1.8 mm (p < 0.01), resulting in a significantly greater % stoma reduction (76.8 ± 8.5 % vs. 84.2 ± 5.1 %, p < 0.01) versus the IRT group. PST resulted in greater % excess weight loss over time compared to IRT. Sixteen comorbid conditions resolved among 12 patients. No major complications occurred. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic revision of the gastric outlet results in meaningful weight loss and comorbidity resolution in select patients experiencing weight regain following RYGB. A PST revision likely results in higher and more sustainable weight loss when compared to IRT.

Long-term patterns and predictors of pain following laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a patient-centered analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair has been shown to offer patients the benefit of less postoperative pain as compared to traditional open techniques. However, the risk of experiencing significant postoperative pain may affect patient's decision making. We aimed to elucidate potential patterns of pain and the predictors of such, up to 2 years postoperatively, using both generic and specific quality of life tools. METHODS: Patients undergoing laparoscopic totally extra-peritoneal inguinal hernia repair were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Short form-36, Surgical Outcomes Measurement System (SOMS) and Carolinas Comfort Scale (CCS) surveys were administered pre- and postoperatively at 3 weeks, 6 months, 1 and 2 years. Patients with concomitant procedures were excluded. Significant pain was considered mild but bothersome or worse on either specific tool (SOMS scores ≥3/4, CCS scores ≥2). Predictors of significant pain were determined by logistic regression. RESULTS: From 2009 to 2015, 482 patients enrolled in our database underwent elective TEP repair of 626 hernias and completed an assessment tool. Mean age was 57 (±15) years, with 93 % male. Reported pain on all three tools improved significantly from baseline over time (p < 0.01). Significant pain on either specific tool, related or unrelated to surgery, was reported by 52 % of respondents (158/301) preoperatively, and postoperatively by 50 % at 3 weeks (111/220), 21 % at 6 months (15/70), 13 % at 1 year (14/108), and 25 % at 2 years (30/121). Significant pain at 6 months-2 years correlated more significantly with general health status than surgical factors. CONCLUSIONS: Significant pain can be as high as 50 % at 3 weeks on surgery-specific quality of life measures, but with significant improvement by 6 months which is maintained through 2 years. Poor quality of life and general health were the main predictors of pain after 6 months.