MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Long versus short peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: results of a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial
Long versus short peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: results of a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Long versus short peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: results of a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Long versus short peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: results of a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial
Long versus short peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: results of a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Long versus short peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: results of a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial
Long versus short peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: results of a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial
Journal Article

Long versus short peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: results of a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial

2023
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
ObjectivePeroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has become standard treatment for achalasia with comparable efficacy to surgery. In most of published series, the length of myotomy is 12–13 cm. Shorter cuts could have the advantage of shorter procedure time and possibly reduced gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) rate.DesignThis single-centre, patient-blinded, randomised, non-inferiority clinical trial included 200 patients, who were randomly allocated, to receive either a long-POEM (13 cm; 101 patients) or a short-POEM (8 cm; 99 patients). Primary outcome was defined as an Eckardt symptom score of ≤3 at 24 months after the procedure; a non-inferiority design was chosen with an accepted success range of 6% between the two treatments. Secondary outcomes included operating time, complication rate, postoperative manometry, GORD rate and quality of life.ResultsIn the intention-to-treat analysis, clinical success rates were 89.1% in the long-POEM and 98.0% in the short-POEM group, resulting in an absolute between-group difference of −8.9% (90% CI −14.5 to −3.3).Procedure time was significantly reduced in the short-POEM as compared with the long-POEM group (40 vs 50 min, p<0.0001). Severe adverse events occurred in one patient in both groups.No differences were observed in postoperative GORD: acid exposure >6% on pH monitoring study at 6 months was seen in 34.3% (long-POEM) vs 31.1% (short-POEM), while endoscopic oesophagitis was diagnosed in 37.6% vs 51.5% at 6 months and in 21% vs 24.5% at 24 months. Regular proton pump inhibitor use was not different either (36.8% vs 37.5%).ConclusionsOur study demonstrates non-inferiority of a shorter cut length of POEM as compared with the standard treatment, which saved some procedural time. GORD rate was not reduced by reducing cutting length.Trial registration number NCT03450928.