Madhusudhan R Sanaka1, Pravallika Chadalavada2, Fahrettin Covut2, Rajat Garg2, Prashanthi N Thota3, Scott Gabbard3, Mohammad Alomari2, Sudish Murthy4, Siva Raja4. 1. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. sanakam@ccf.org. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA. 3. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. 4. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification system was developed as a simple categorization of patients' physiological status that predicts the operative risk. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a less invasive alternative to surgical myotomy in achalasia. As such, POEM seems to be an appealing option for high-risk patients with achalasia. However, there are no studies which systematically analyzed the outcomes of POEM among patients with different ASA classes. Hence, we aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of POEM in patients with lower and higher ASA classes. METHODS: Medical records of all achalasia patients who underwent POEM at our institution between April 2014 and May 2019 were reviewed. Patients were categorized arbitrarily into two groups, lower ASA class (ASA I and II combined) and higher ASA class (ASA class III and IV combined). Demographic and procedural details, timed barium swallow (TBE), high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM), pH study findings and Eckardt scores were compared between the two groups. Baseline characteristics were compared using Chi-square test and two-sample t-test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 144 patients met our study criteria (lower ASA class, n = 44; and higher ASA class, n = 100). Patients in higher ASA class were significantly more obese and older. More patients in lower ASA class had prior Heller myotomy and more patients in higher ASA Class had prior botulinum toxin injections. Procedural parameters were similar in both groups. Procedural complications were infrequent and were also similar in the two groups. The length of stay, 30-day readmission rate, reflux symptoms and esophageal pH study findings were also comparable between the two groups. Treatment success was similar in both groups, 97.7% in lower ASA class versus 92% in higher ASA class (p = 0.19). At 2-month follow-up, both groups had significant improvement in HREM and TBE parameters. CONCLUSION: POEM is a very safe and highly effective treatment option for achalasia patients with advanced ASA class similar to lower ASA class patients. POEM may be considered as the preferred choice for myotomy in these high-risk achalasia patients due to its low morbidity and high efficacy.
INTRODUCTION: The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification system was developed as a simple categorization of patients' physiological status that predicts the operative risk. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a less invasive alternative to surgical myotomy in achalasia. As such, POEM seems to be an appealing option for high-risk patients with achalasia. However, there are no studies which systematically analyzed the outcomes of POEM among patients with different ASA classes. Hence, we aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of POEM in patients with lower and higher ASA classes. METHODS: Medical records of all achalasia patients who underwent POEM at our institution between April 2014 and May 2019 were reviewed. Patients were categorized arbitrarily into two groups, lower ASA class (ASA I and II combined) and higher ASA class (ASA class III and IV combined). Demographic and procedural details, timed barium swallow (TBE), high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM), pH study findings and Eckardt scores were compared between the two groups. Baseline characteristics were compared using Chi-square test and two-sample t-test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 144 patients met our study criteria (lower ASA class, n = 44; and higher ASA class, n = 100). Patients in higher ASA class were significantly more obese and older. More patients in lower ASA class had prior Heller myotomy and more patients in higher ASA Class had prior botulinum toxin injections. Procedural parameters were similar in both groups. Procedural complications were infrequent and were also similar in the two groups. The length of stay, 30-day readmission rate, reflux symptoms and esophageal pH study findings were also comparable between the two groups. Treatment success was similar in both groups, 97.7% in lower ASA class versus 92% in higher ASA class (p = 0.19). At 2-month follow-up, both groups had significant improvement in HREM and TBE parameters. CONCLUSION: POEM is a very safe and highly effective treatment option for achalasia patients with advanced ASA class similar to lower ASA class patients. POEM may be considered as the preferred choice for myotomy in these high-risk achalasia patients due to its low morbidity and high efficacy.
Authors: Stavros N Stavropoulos; David J Desilets; Karl-Hermann Fuchs; Christopher J Gostout; Gregory Haber; Haruhiro Inoue; Michael L Kochman; Rani Modayil; Thomas Savides; Daniel J Scott; Lee L Swanstrom; Melina C Vassiliou Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Madhusudhan R Sanaka; Umar Hayat; Prashanthi N Thota; Ramprasad Jegadeesan; Monica Ray; Scott L Gabbard; Neha Wadhwa; Rocio Lopez; Mark E Baker; Sudish Murthy; Siva Raja Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-05-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Yuki B Werner; Bengt Hakanson; Jan Martinek; Alessandro Repici; Burkhard H A von Rahden; Albert J Bredenoord; Raf Bisschops; Helmut Messmann; Marius C Vollberg; Tania Noder; Jan F Kersten; Oliver Mann; Jakob Izbicki; Alexander Pazdro; Uberto Fumagalli; Riccardo Rosati; Christoph-Thomas Germer; Marlies P Schijven; Alice Emmermann; Daniel von Renteln; Paul Fockens; Guy Boeckxstaens; Thomas Rösch Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-12-05 Impact factor: 91.245
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
Authors: Suneetha Ramani Moonesinghe; Michael G Mythen; Priya Das; Kathryn M Rowan; Michael P W Grocott Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Mouen A Khashab; Marcelo F Vela; Nirav Thosani; Deepak Agrawal; James L Buxbaum; Syed M Abbas Fehmi; Douglas S Fishman; Suryakanth R Gurudu; Laith H Jamil; Terry L Jue; Bijun Sai Kannadath; Joanna K Law; Jeffrey K Lee; Mariam Naveed; Bashar J Qumseya; Mandeep S Sawhney; Julie Yang; Sachin Wani Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2019-12-13 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Eric S Hungness; Joel M Sternbach; Ezra N Teitelbaum; Peter J Kahrilas; John E Pandolfino; Nathaniel J Soper Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 12.969