Literature DB >> 27338580

Reduced postoperative pain scores and narcotic use favor per-oral endoscopic myotomy over laparoscopic Heller myotomy.

Salvatore Docimo1, Abraham Mathew2, Alexander J Shope3, Joshua S Winder3, Randy S Haluck3, Eric M Pauli3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a less invasive therapy for achalasia with a shorter hospitalization but with similar short- and long-term outcomes as a laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM). Previous literature comparing POEM to LHM has focused primarily on postoperative outcome parameters such as complications, dysphagia scores and gastro-esophageal reflux severity. This study specifically compares postoperative pain following POEM to pain following LHM, the current gold-standard operation.
METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing POEM or LHM for achalasia was performed from 2006 to 2015. Data collection included demographics, comorbidities, length of stay (LOS) and pain scores (arrival to the recovery room, 1 h postoperative, average first 24 h and upon discharge). Statistical analysis was performed using Student's t test and Chi-square test.
RESULTS: Forty-four POEM patients and 122 LHM patients were identified. The average age (52.2 ± 20.75 vs 50.9 ± 17.89 years, p = 0.306) and BMI (28.1 ± 7.62 vs 27.6 ± 7.07 kg/m2, p = 0.824) did not differ between the POEM and LHM groups, respectively; however, the American Society of Anesthesiology scores were higher in the POEM patients (2.43 ± 0.62 vs 2.11 ± 0.71, p = 0.011). There were no differences in rates of smoking, diabetes, cardiac disease or pulmonary disease. The average pain scores upon arrival to the recovery room and 1 h postoperatively were lower in the POEM group (2.3 ± 3.014 vs 3.61 ± 3 0.418, p = 0.025 and 2.2 ± 2.579 vs 3.46 ± 3.063, p = 0.034, respectively). There was no difference in the average pain score over the first 24 h (2.7 ± 2.067 vs 3.29 ± 1.980, p = 0.472) or at the time of discharge (1.6 ± 2.420 vs 2.09 ± 2.157, p = 0.0657) between the POEM and LHM groups. After standardizing opioid administration against 10 mg of oral morphine, the POEM group used significantly less narcotics that the LHM group (35.8 vs 101.8 mg, p < 0.001) while hospitalized. The average LOS for the POEM group was 31.2 h and 55.79 for the LHM group (p < 0.0001). At discharge, fewer POEM patients required a prescription for a narcotic analgesic (6.81 vs 92.4 %, p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: POEM demonstrated significantly less postoperative pain upon arrival to the recovery room and 1 h postoperatively. To achieve similar pain scores during the first 24 h and at discharge, LHM patients required more narcotic analgesic administration. Despite a significantly shorter LOS, fewer POEM patients require a prescription for narcotic analgesics compared to LHM. POEM is a less painful procedure for achalasia than LHM, permitting earlier hospital discharge with little need for home narcotic use.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Achalasia; Laparoscopic Heller myotomy; POEM; Per-oral endoscopic myotomy

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27338580     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5034-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  19 in total

1.  Diagnosis and management of achalasia. American College of Gastroenterology Practice Parameter Committee.

Authors:  M F Vaezi; J E Richter
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 10.864

2.  How i do it: per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM).

Authors:  Jeffrey L Ponsky; Jeffrey M Marks; Eric M Pauli
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-03-27       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 3.  Peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia.

Authors:  A J Bredenoord; T Rösch; P Fockens
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 3.598

4.  Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia.

Authors:  H Inoue; H Minami; Y Kobayashi; Y Sato; M Kaga; M Suzuki; H Satodate; N Odaka; H Itoh; S Kudo
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 10.093

Review 5.  Efficacy of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in the treatment of achalasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rupjyoti Talukdar; Haruhiro Inoue; D Nageshwar Reddy
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-12-25       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Peroral endoscopic myotomy: A short-term comparison with the standard laparoscopic approach.

Authors:  Michael B Ujiki; Amy K Yetasook; Matthew Zapf; John G Linn; Joann M Carbray; Woody Denham
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 3.982

Review 7.  Achalasia.

Authors:  J C Reynolds; H P Parkman
Journal:  Gastroenterol Clin North Am       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 3.806

Review 8.  Meta-analysis of randomized and controlled treatment trials for achalasia.

Authors:  Lan Wang; You-Ming Li; Lan Li
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2008-12-24       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 9.  Achalasia: a review of clinical diagnosis, epidemiology, treatment and outcomes.

Authors:  Orla M O'Neill; Brian T Johnston; Helen G Coleman
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-09-21       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Quality of life comparing dor and toupet after heller myotomy for achalasia.

Authors:  Jonathan M Tomasko; Toms Augustin; Tung T Tran; Randy S Haluck; Ann M Rogers; Jerome R Lyn-Sue
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2014 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.172

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Updated Systematic Review of Achalasia, with a Focus on POEM Therapy.

Authors:  Mitchell S Cappell; Stavros Nicholas Stavropoulos; David Friedel
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-08-27       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Long-term dysphagia resolution following POEM versus Heller myotomy for achalasia patients.

Authors:  Grace E Shea; Morgan K Johnson; Manasa Venkatesh; Sally A Jolles; Tyler M Prout; Amber L Shada; Jacob A Greenberg; Anne O Lidor; Luke M Funk
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-07-10       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Recent Advances in Third-Space Endoscopy.

Authors:  Zaheer Nabi; D Nageshwar Reddy; Mohan Ramchandani
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)       Date:  2018-04

4.  [Surgical treatment of achalasia - endoscopic or laparoscopic? : Proposal for a tailored approach].

Authors:  B H A von Rahden; J Filser; M Al-Nasser; C-T Germer
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 0.955

5.  High Eckardt score and previous treatment were associated with poor postperoral endoscopic myotomy pain control: A retrospective study.

Authors:  Wan-Nan Chen; Yao-Lin Xu; Xiao-Guang Zhang
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 1.534

6.  Paravertebral anesthetic nerve block for pain control after peroral endoscopic myotomy.

Authors:  B Joseph Elmunzer; Briana R Lewis; Kristen F Miller; Bethany J Wolf; Lydia Zeiler; David A Gutman; Pooja Elias; Aylin Tansel; Robert A Moran; Eric D Bolin
Journal:  Tech Innov Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2021-06-24

7.  Cost-effectiveness of per oral endoscopic myotomy relative to laparoscopic Heller myotomy for the treatment of achalasia.

Authors:  Erin K Greenleaf; Joshua S Winder; Christopher S Hollenbeak; Randy S Haluck; Abraham Mathew; Eric M Pauli
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic Heller myotomy versus per-oral endoscopic myotomy for management of achalasia.

Authors:  Steven G Leeds; J S Burdick; Gerald O Ogola; Estrellita Ontiveros
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2017-10

9.  Outcomes of 100 Patients More Than 4 Years After POEM for Achalasia.

Authors:  Ryan A J Campagna; Arturo Cirera; Amy L Holmstrom; Joseph R Triggs; Ezra N Teitelbaum; Dustin A Carlson; John E Pandolfino; Eric S Hungness
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 13.787

10.  Gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) after peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM).

Authors:  Jun Liang Teh; Hui Yu Tham; Alex Yu Sen Soh; Corrisa Chee; Guowei Kim; Asim Shabbir; Reuben Kong Min Wong; Jimmy Bok Yan So
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-07-29       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.