Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Zenker’s Diverticula: Feasibility of a Tailored Approach Based on Diverticulum Size
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.
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?
Zenker’s Diverticula: Feasibility of a Tailored Approach Based on Diverticulum Size
Do you wish to request the book?
Zenker’s Diverticula: Feasibility of a Tailored Approach Based on Diverticulum Size
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
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.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Zenker’s Diverticula: Feasibility of a Tailored Approach Based on Diverticulum Size
2008
Overview
Background
Zenker’s diverticula (ZD) can be treated by transoral diverticulostomy or open surgery (upper esophageal sphincter myotomy and diverticulectomy or diverticulopexy). The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a minimally invasive (group A) versus a traditional open surgical approach (group B) in the treatment of ZD.
Material and Methods
Between 1993 and September 2007, 128 ZD patients underwent transoral diverticulostomy (
n
= 51) or cricopharyngeal myotomy and diverticulectomy or diverticulopexy (
n
= 77). All patients were evaluated for symptoms using a detailed questionnaire. Manometry recorded upper esophageal sphincter (UES) pressure, relaxations, and intrabolus pharyngeal pressure. The size of the pouch was measured on the barium swallow. The choice of treatment was based on the size of the diverticulum and the patients’ preference. Long-term follow-up data were available for 121/128 (94.5%) patients with a median follow-up of 40 months (interquartile range, 17–83).
Results
Mortality was nil. Three patients in group A (5.8%) and ten in group B (13%) had postoperative complications (
p
= n.s.). Hospital stays were markedly shorter for patients after diverticulostomy (
p
< 0.01). Postoperative manometry showed a reduction in UES pressure, improved UES relaxation, and lower intrabolus pressure in both groups (
p
< 0.05). Four patients in the open surgery group (5.2%) complained of severe dysphagia after surgery (three of them required endoscopic dilations). In the transoral diverticulostomy group, 11 patients (21.5%) required additional septal reduction (
n
= 8) or a surgical myotomy (
n
= 3) for persistent symptoms (
p
< 0.01); nine of these 11 patients had a ZD ≤ 3 cm in size. After primary and complementary treatments, symptoms disappeared or improved significantly at long-term follow-up in 93.5% of patients in group A and 96% of those in group B.
Conclusion
Diverticulostomy is safe, quick, and effective for most patients with medium-sized ZD, but open surgery offers better long-term results as a primary treatment and should be recommended for younger, healthy patients, especially those with small diverticula. Small ZD may represent a formal contraindication to the transoral approach because an excessively short septum prevents a complete division of the sphincter fibers.
Publisher
Springer-Verlag,Springer Nature B.V
