C Van Severen, S Koch, J Faure, M Poncin, J-P Loly
{"title":"Peroral endoscopic myotomy: a two-center retrospective study of practice and adverse events.","authors":"C Van Severen, S Koch, J Faure, M Poncin, J-P Loly","doi":"10.51821/87.1.12358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is the preferred technique for the treatment of esophageal motility disorders and is less invasive than surgery. This study was performed to compare two university centers in the practice of POEM, in terms of efficacy and adverse events, for the treatment of esophageal motility disorder.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Retrospective comparative study of patients undergoing a POEM between September 2020 and December 2022 from the University Hospital of Liège (Belgium) and Besançon (France). The clinical success was defined by an Eckardt score ≤ 3 after the procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-five patients were included. In both centers, 87,3% of the patients had achalasia (mostly type II), and 12,7% had another esophageal motility disorder. The use of antibiotic prophylaxis was systematic in Liège center but not in Besançon center (100% and 9.1% respectively). The mean value of the post-operative Eckardt score was 1.55± 2.48 in both center with 93.2% of patients with a score ≤ 3 (92% in Besançon and 94.74% in Liège). The rate of adverse event was generally low. There were two minor adverse events more frequent in Liège, clinical capnomediastinum and pain at day one, but they were managed with conservative treatment. Only 7.3% of the total patients had an infectious phenomenon that did not correlate with the use of antibiotic prophylaxis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The post-operative Eckardt score and the adverse event rate were comparable between the university centers. This study confirmed that POEM is a safe and effective technique. It also showed that using an antibiotic prophylaxis does not influence the development of infectious adverse events.</p>","PeriodicalId":7322,"journal":{"name":"Acta gastro-enterologica Belgica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta gastro-enterologica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51821/87.1.12358","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and study aims: Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is the preferred technique for the treatment of esophageal motility disorders and is less invasive than surgery. This study was performed to compare two university centers in the practice of POEM, in terms of efficacy and adverse events, for the treatment of esophageal motility disorder.
Patients and methods: Retrospective comparative study of patients undergoing a POEM between September 2020 and December 2022 from the University Hospital of Liège (Belgium) and Besançon (France). The clinical success was defined by an Eckardt score ≤ 3 after the procedure.
Results: Fifty-five patients were included. In both centers, 87,3% of the patients had achalasia (mostly type II), and 12,7% had another esophageal motility disorder. The use of antibiotic prophylaxis was systematic in Liège center but not in Besançon center (100% and 9.1% respectively). The mean value of the post-operative Eckardt score was 1.55± 2.48 in both center with 93.2% of patients with a score ≤ 3 (92% in Besançon and 94.74% in Liège). The rate of adverse event was generally low. There were two minor adverse events more frequent in Liège, clinical capnomediastinum and pain at day one, but they were managed with conservative treatment. Only 7.3% of the total patients had an infectious phenomenon that did not correlate with the use of antibiotic prophylaxis.
Conclusion: The post-operative Eckardt score and the adverse event rate were comparable between the university centers. This study confirmed that POEM is a safe and effective technique. It also showed that using an antibiotic prophylaxis does not influence the development of infectious adverse events.
期刊介绍:
The Journal Acta Gastro-Enterologica Belgica principally publishes peer-reviewed original manuscripts, reviews, letters to editors, book reviews and guidelines in the field of clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, including digestive oncology, digestive pathology, as well as nutrition. Pure animal or in vitro work will not be considered for publication in the Journal. Translational research papers (including sections of animal or in vitro work) are considered by the Journal if they have a clear relationship to or relevance for clinical hepato-gastroenterology (screening, disease mechanisms and/or new therapies). Case reports and clinical images will be accepted if they represent an important contribution to the description, the pathogenesis or the treatment of a specific gastroenterology or liver problem. The language of the Journal is English. Papers from any country will be considered for publication. Manuscripts submitted to the Journal should not have been published previously (in English or any other language), nor should they be under consideration for publication elsewhere. Unsolicited papers are peer-reviewed before it is decided whether they should be accepted, rejected, or returned for revision. Manuscripts that do not meet the presentation criteria (as indicated below) will be returned to the authors. Papers that go too far beyond the scope of the journal will be also returned to the authors by the editorial board generally within 2 weeks. The Journal reserves the right to edit the language of papers accepted for publication for clarity and correctness, and to make formal changes to ensure compliance with AGEB’s style. Authors have the opportunity to review such changes in the proofs.