食道贲门失弛缓症患儿腹腔镜海勒肌切开术与口内镜下肌切开术的比较:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2.1 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Annals of Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-23 DOI:10.20524/aog.2024.0923
Anastasia Dimopoulou, Dimitra Dimopoulou, Antonis Analitis, Konstantina Dimopoulou, Dionysios Dellaportas, Nikolaos Zavras
{"title":"食道贲门失弛缓症患儿腹腔镜海勒肌切开术与口内镜下肌切开术的比较:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

背景:目前,腹腔镜海勒肌切开术(LHM)和口周内镜下肌切开术(POEM)是治疗儿童食管贲门失弛缓症的最佳方法。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在比较 LHM 和 POEM 的疗效:方法:在 PubMed/Medline、谷歌学术和 Web of Science 中对比较 LHM 和 POEM 的原始文章进行了系统性文献检索。对所有文章的手术时间、住院时间、术前和术后 Eckardt 评分(ES)以及术前和术后下食管括约肌(LES)压力进行了分析:结果:共选取并审查了 32 篇文章,报告了 800 名儿童的情况。由于 LHM 组的 ES 和 LES 诊断值缺失,因此荟萃分析仅限于 POEM 结果。根据随机效应模型,手术前后的平均 ES 差异为 4.387(95% 置信区间 [CI] 3.799-4.974),与零有显著差异(z=14.64,PC 结论:POEM在术前、术后ES和LES压力以及手术持续时间方面都有积极的结果,而POEM和LHM的住院时间相当。有必要进行精心设计的研究,以进一步明确这两种方法之间的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Laparoscopic Heller myotomy versus peroral endoscopic myotomy in children with esophageal achalasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Gastroenterology
Annals of Gastroenterology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信