| Literature DB >> 30425974 |
Jiaxin Xu1, Tianyin Chen1, Shaimaa Elkholy2, Meidong Xu1, Yunshi Zhong1, Yiqun Zhang1, Weifeng Chen1, Wenzheng Qin1, Mingyan Cai1, Pinghong Zhou1.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Gastric peroral endoscopic myotomy (G-POEM) has been regarded as a novel and minimally invasive therapy for refractory gastroparesis. This study reports the long-term outcomes and possible predictive factors for successful outcomes after G-POEM in an Asian population.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30425974 PMCID: PMC6217887 DOI: 10.1155/2018/6409698
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol ISSN: 2291-2789
Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI).
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Figure 1G-POEM procedure: (a) endoscopic view of the narrow pylorus; (b) injection and submucosal incision made 3 to 4 cm from the pylorus in the greater curvature of the antrum; (c) tunnel creation to approximately 2 cm passing over the pylorus; (d)-(e) myotomy of the pyloric and antral muscular layers; (f) endoscopic view of the pylorus after G-POEM; (g) mucosal entry closure by metal clips; (h) mucosal entry scar after 3 months of healing; and (i) endoscopic view of the pylorus after 3 months.
Demographic features, clinical features, and follow-up.
|
| 63.5 (26-82) |
|
| 11/5 |
|
| |
| Postsurgical | 13 (81.2%) |
| Diabetic | 3 (18.8%) |
|
| 22 (2-84) |
|
| |
| PPIs | 16 (100%) |
| Metoclopramide | 14 (87.5%) |
| Nasojejunal nutrition tube | 5 (31.3%) |
|
| |
| Nausea | 3.37±1.59 |
| Retching | 2.56±1.82 |
| Vomiting | 3.75±1.61 |
| Stomach fullness | 3.13±1.67 |
| Not able to finish a normal-sized meal | 4.06±1.18 |
| Feeling excessively full after a meal | 3.31±1.54 |
| Loss of appetite | 1.94±1.98 |
| Bloating | 1.94±1.88 |
| Stomach or belly visibly large | 0.19±0.75 |
| Total | 24.25±5.47 |
|
| |
| Half emptying time (min, mean (±SD)) | 183.20±77.39 |
| Retention at 2 hours (mean (±SD)) | 69.33±11.46% |
|
| 100% |
|
| 45.25±12.96 |
|
| |
| Metal clip | 13 (81.2%) |
| Overstitch | 3 (18.8%) |
|
| 6 (4-10) |
|
| 0 |
|
| 14.5 (5-19) |
|
| 6.37±6.34 |
|
| |
| Half emptying time (min, mean (±SD)) | 83.98±34.65 |
| Retention at 2 hours | 33.38±18.17% |
|
| 13 (81.3%) |
G-POEM: gastric per oral endoscopy myotomy, GSCI: Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index.
Figure 2(a) Upper gastrointestinal radiography before G-POEM showing a narrow pyloric canal (shown with a red arrow) in the patient post-subtotal gastrectomy and (b) upper gastrointestinal radiography showing contrast passing freely through the pylorus after G-POEM (shown with a green arrow).
Patient assessments before and after G-POEM.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 24.25±5.47 | 6.37±6.34 | <0.001 |
|
| |||
| Half emptying time (min) | 183.20±77.39 | 83.98±34.65 | 0.012 |
| Retention at 2 hours (%) | 69.33±11.46% | 33.38±18.17% | 0.012 |
G-POEM: gastric per oral endoscopy myotomy, GSCI: Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index, GES: gastric emptying scintigraphy.
Figure 3(a) Endoscopic view of a recurrent patient showing the mucosa near the pylorus shrinking and the scar beneath contracting and (b) pylorus opened widely after endoscopic radial incision.
Univariate regression analysis of the clinical outcomes of the patients.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.11 | 1.1168 | 0.99-1.25 | 0.017 |
|
| 0.076 | 1.07 | 0.93-1.24 | 0.1255 |
|
| -0.3 | 0.74 | 0.54-1.0037 | 0.0157 |
|
| -0.021 | 0.971 | 0.95-1.0042 | 0.059 |
|
| -0.204 | 0.815 | 0.65-1.008 | 0.0078 |
GSCI: Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index.
Figure 4Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve showing 100% sensitivity and 66.7% specificity of the Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI) at a cut-off value ≤30 for predicting the clinical response of the patients.
Predictive values for successful clinical outcomes in the patients.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 100% | 66.7% | 0.885 | 0.002 | 95.3% | 100% |
|
| 84.6% | 100% | 0.872 | <0.001 | 100% | 59.97% |
|
| 84.6% | 100% | 0.923 | <0.001 | 100% | 59.97% |
GSCI: Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index.
Figure 5Box plot of the Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GSCI) among patients who achieved clinical success and patients who did not.
Figure 6Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve showing 84.6% sensitivity and 100% specificity of gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES) for predicting the clinical response of the patients.
Figure 7Box plot showing the distribution of gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES), including both half emptying time (HET) in minutes and retention percentage at 2 hours (RH2), among patients who achieved clinical success and patients who did not.
Figure 8Box plot of the gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES) including the half emptying time (HET) and the retention percentage at 2 hours (RH2) against Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GSCI).