Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy: Short Versus Long Esophageal Myotomy for Achalasia Cardia: A Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial

Praveer Rai,Pankaj Kumar,Amit Goel,Thakur Prashant Singh,Prabhaker Mishra,Prashant Verma,Ajay Kumar,Vinod Kumar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/sle.0000000000001303
2024-07-11
Abstract:Background and Aims: The appropriate length of esophageal myotomy in peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia cardia remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the outcome of short (≤3 cm) and long (≥6 cm) esophageal myotomy in patients with type I and II achalasia cardia. Methods: This single-blinded, randomized controlled noninferiority trial was conducted at a tertiary center between July 2021 and December 2021. Patients with achalasia types I and II were randomized into short (≤3 cm) and long (≥6 cm) esophageal myotomy groups. The primary outcome of the study was clinical success (Eckardt score ≤3) 1 year after the procedure. The secondary outcomes included a comparison of technical success, operating duration, occurrence of intraoperative adverse events, alterations in integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), change in barium column height after 5 minutes (1 mo), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (3 mo) between the groups. Results: Fifty-four patients were randomized into the short (n=27) or long (n=27) esophageal myotomy groups. Technical success rates were 100% (27/27) and 96.3% (26/27) in short myotomy (SM) and long myotomy (LM) groups, respectively. The clinical success rates were 96.3% (26/27) and 96.2% (25/26) in the SM and LM groups, respectively ( P =0.998). The mean (±SD) length of the esophageal myotomy was 2.75±0.36 cm in the SM and 6.69±1.35 cm in the LM groups ( P <0.001). The mean (±SD) procedure time for the SM and LM groups was 61.22±8.44 and 82.42±14.70 minutes ( P 6%) did not differ significantly between the 2 groups following POEM treatment. Conclusions: Short myotomy is noninferior to long myotomy in terms of clinical success, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and intraoperative adverse events at the short-term follow-up ( P >0.05). Short myotomy resulted in a reduced operative time ( P <0.05).
surgery
What problem does this paper attempt to address?