{"title":"Laparoscopic Heller myotomy versus peroral endoscopic myotomy in children with esophageal achalasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Anastasia Dimopoulou, Dimitra Dimopoulou, Antonis Analitis, Konstantina Dimopoulou, Dionysios Dellaportas, Nikolaos Zavras","doi":"10.20524/aog.2024.0923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Currently, laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) are the best treatment modalities for esophageal achalasia in children. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of LHM and POEM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar and Web of Science for original articles comparing LHM and POEM. All articles were analyzed with respect to operation duration, length of hospital stay, pre- and postoperative Eckardt score (ES), and pre- and postoperative lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 32 articles, reporting on 800 children, were selected and reviewed. Because of missing diagnostic values of ES and LES in the LHM group, the meta-analysis was limited to the POEM results. According to the random-effects model, the mean ES difference between pre- and post-operation was 4.387 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.799-4.974), significantly different to zero (z=14.64, P<0.001), while the mean LES pressure difference was 3.63 mmHg mmHg (95%CI 2247-3.879), significantly different to zero (z=7.36, P<0.001). Operation duration was 130.15 min (95%CI 62.59-197.71) for the LHM method and 83.64 min (95%CI 55.14-112.14) for POEM. The pooled estimate of length of hospital stay was 3.4 days (95%CI 2.6-4.44) and it was comparable between the 2 methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>POEM has positive outcomes regarding ES and LES pressure pre- and postoperatively, as well as operation duration, while the length of hospitalization was comparable between POEM and LHM. Well-designed studies are warranted to further clarify differences between the 2 methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":7978,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Gastroenterology","volume":"37 6","pages":"655-664"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11574155/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20524/aog.2024.0923","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Currently, laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) are the best treatment modalities for esophageal achalasia in children. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of LHM and POEM.
Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar and Web of Science for original articles comparing LHM and POEM. All articles were analyzed with respect to operation duration, length of hospital stay, pre- and postoperative Eckardt score (ES), and pre- and postoperative lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure.
Results: A total of 32 articles, reporting on 800 children, were selected and reviewed. Because of missing diagnostic values of ES and LES in the LHM group, the meta-analysis was limited to the POEM results. According to the random-effects model, the mean ES difference between pre- and post-operation was 4.387 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.799-4.974), significantly different to zero (z=14.64, P<0.001), while the mean LES pressure difference was 3.63 mmHg mmHg (95%CI 2247-3.879), significantly different to zero (z=7.36, P<0.001). Operation duration was 130.15 min (95%CI 62.59-197.71) for the LHM method and 83.64 min (95%CI 55.14-112.14) for POEM. The pooled estimate of length of hospital stay was 3.4 days (95%CI 2.6-4.44) and it was comparable between the 2 methods.
Conclusions: POEM has positive outcomes regarding ES and LES pressure pre- and postoperatively, as well as operation duration, while the length of hospitalization was comparable between POEM and LHM. Well-designed studies are warranted to further clarify differences between the 2 methods.