Download PDF
Endoscopy 2017; 49(12): 1209-1218
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-117401
Original article
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Long-term quality of life after peroral endoscopic myotomy remains compromised in patients with achalasia type III

Oscar V. Hernández Mondragón
1   Division of Endoscopy, Specialties Hospital, National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico
,
Marina A. González Martinez
1   Division of Endoscopy, Specialties Hospital, National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico
,
Juan M. Blancas Valencia
1   Division of Endoscopy, Specialties Hospital, National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico
,
Maria L. Hernandez Reyes
2   Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology. National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico
,
Omar M. Solórzano Pineda
1   Division of Endoscopy, Specialties Hospital, National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico
,
Gerardo Blanco Velasco
1   Division of Endoscopy, Specialties Hospital, National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 30 December 2016

accepted after revision 08 June 2017

Publication Date:
12 September 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

See also:

Video Comment on Oscar V. Hernández Mondragón et al.Endoscopy 2017; 49(12): v38-v38
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-120813

Abstract

Background and study aims Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is an excellent endoscopic treatment for achalasia. Clinical and manometric parameters are used for evaluation and follow-up. However, clinical success does not guarantee high quality of life (QoL) scores, generating doubts about their direct relationship. We aimed to evaluate QoL scores before and after POEM at medium and long term, to evaluate differences between achalasia subtypes and find which factors related to low QoL scores.

Patients and methods Achalasia-confirmed patients undergoing POEM between February 2012 and November 2016. and completing at least 1 year of follow-up, were included. Assessment before and at 1, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 months after POEM employed manometry, barium series, Eckardt score, and the AE-18 health-related QoL scale. Demographic, clinical, and procedure characteristics were documented, with comparisons between subgroups. Multiple logistic regression analysis was done.

Results 65 of 88 patients were included (38 women, 27 men; median age 47 years, interquartile range [IQR] 20 – 81), and 50 (76.9 %) completed 4 years of follow-up. Eckardt score improved (median, preprocedure 10 vs. post-procedure 2; P = 0.002) and this persisted. There was initial improvement in median integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) (29.4 mmHg [16 – 55] vs. 10.3 mmHg [3 – 18]; P = 0.000) and median QoL scores (40 vs. 68 at 1 month; P = 0.002); however IRP increased and QoL scores decreased. Men with confirmed type III achalasia had low QoL scores.

Conclusions All patients had significant clinical improvement after POEM, with medium- to long-term persistence. Though quality of life and IRP initially improved, they deteriorated in the long term. Male sex and type III achalasia seem to be associated with low QoL scores.

 

  • References

  • 1 Francis DL, Katzka DA. Achalasia: update on the disease and its treatment. Gastroenterology 2010; 139: 369-374
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Kahrilas PJ, Boeckxstaens G. The spectrum of achalasia: lessons from studies of pathophysiology and high-resolution manometry. Gastroenterology 2013; 145: 954-965
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Eckardt DF. Clinical presentations and complications of achalasia. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2001; 11: 281-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Krill J, Naik R, Vaezi MF. Clinical management of achalasia: current state of the art. Clin Exp Gastroenterol 2016; 9: 71-82
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Stefanidis D, Richardson W, Farrell TM. et al. Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons. SAGES guidelines for the surgical treatment of esophageal achalasia. Surg Endosc 2012; 26: 296-311
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Vaezi MF, Pandolfino JE, Vela MF. ACG clinical guideline: diagnosis and management of achalasia. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: 1238-1249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Inoue H, Minami H, Kobayashi Y. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia. Endoscopy 2010; 42: 265-271
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Sharata A, Kurian AA, Dunst CM. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is safe and effective in the setting of prior endoscopic intervention. J Gastrointest Surg 2013; 17: 1188-1192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Pannala R, Abu B, Aslanian H. et al. Per-oral endoscopic myotomy. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 86: 1051-1060
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Swastrom LL, Kurian A, Dunst CM. et al. Long-term outcomes of an endoscopic myotomy for achalasia: The POEM procedure. Ann Surg 2012; 256: 659-667
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Chandrasekhara V, Desilets D, Falk GW. et al. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy PIVI (Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations) on peroral endoscopic myotomy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 1087-1100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Stavropoulos SN, Desilets D, Fuchs K. et al. Per-oral endoscopic myotomy. White paper summary. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80: 1-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hungness ES, Sternbach JM, Teitelbaum EN. et al. Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) after the learning curve: durable long-term results with a low complication rate. Ann Surg 2016; 264: 508-517
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Tuason J, Inoue H. Current status of achalasia management: a review on diagnosis and treatment. J Gastroenterol 2017; 52: 401-406
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Akintoye E, Kumar N, Obatian I. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy: a meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 1059-1068
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Boeckxstaens GE, Zaninotto G, Richter JE. Achalasia. Lancet 2014; 383: 83-93
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Harnish JL, Darling GE, Diamant NE. et al. Patient-centered measures for achalasia. Surg Endosc 2008; 22: 1290-1293
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Mineo TC, Ambrogi V. Long-term results and quality of life after surgery for esophageal achalasia: one surgeon´s experience. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2004; 25: 1089-1096
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Youssef Y, Richards WO, Sharp K. et al. Relief of dysphagia after laparoscopic Heller myotomy improves long-term quality of life. J Gastrointest Surg 2007; 11: 309-313
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Levi RL, Olden KW, Naliboff BD. et al. Psychosocial aspects of the functional gastrointestinal disorders. Gastroenterology 2006; 130: 1447--1458
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Liu X, Yong Y, Yang R. et al. The outcomes and quality of life of patients with achalasia after peroral endoscopic myotomy in the short-term. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2015; 21: 507-512
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Chan S, Yuen J, Theoh A. et al. Comparison of early outcomes and quality of life after laparoscopic Heller’s cardiomyotomy to peroral endoscopic myotomy for treatment of achalasia. Dig Endosc 2016; 28: 27-32
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Urbach DR, Tomlinson GA, Harnish JL. et al. A measure of disease-specific health-related quality of life for achalasia. Am J Gastroenterol 2005; 100: 1668-1676
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Frankhuisen R, Heijkoop R, van Herwaarden MA. et al. Validation of a disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire in a large simple of Dutch achalasia patients. Dis Esophagus 2008; 21: 544-550
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Garrigues V, Ortiz V, Casanova C. et al. Disease-specific health-related quality of life in patients with esophageal achalasia before and after therapy. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2010; 22: 739-745
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Bredenoord AJ, Fox M, Kahrilas PJ. et al. Chicago classification criteria of esophageal motility disorders defined in high resolution esophageal pressure topography. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2012; 24: 57-65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Eckardt VM, Aignherr C, Bernhard G. Predictors of outcome in patients with achalasia treated by pneumatic dilation. Gastroenterology 1992; 103: 1732-1738
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Vigneswaran Y, Tanaka R, Gitelis M. et al. Quality of life assessment after peroral endoscopic myotomy. Surg Endosc 2015; 29: 1198-1202
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Ward A, Gitelis M, Patel L. et al. Outcomes in patients with over 1-year follow-up after peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). Surg Endosc 2017; 31: 1550-1557
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Snyder CW, Burton RC, Brown LE. et al. Multiple preoperative endoscopic interventions are associated with worse outcomes after laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia. J Gastrointest Surg 2009; 13: 2095-2103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Huffmanm LC, Pandalai PK, Boulton BJ. et al. Robotic Heller myotomy: a safe operation with higher postoperative quality-of-life indices. Surgery 2007; 142: 613-620
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Ponce M, Ortiz V, Juan M. et al. Gastroesophageal reflux, quality of life and satisfaction in patients with achalasia treated with open cardiomyotomy and partial fundoplication. Am J Surg 2003; 185: 560-564
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Ngamruengphong S, Hinoue H, Wai-Yan P. et al. Long-term outcomes of per-oral endoscopic myotomy in patients with achalasia with a minimum follow-up of 2 years: an international multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; pii: S0016–5107(16)30586–7 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.09.017.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Kumbhari V, Tieu A, Onimaru M. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) vs. laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) for the treatment of type III achalasia in 75 patients: a multicenter comparative study. Endosc Int Open 2015; 3: E195-E201
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar