Heller myotomy versus endoscopic balloon dilatation for achalasia

• Verfasst von: Nickel, Felix [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Benner, Laura [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Rupp, Christian [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Müller, Philip C. [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Müller, Beat P. [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Linke, Georg R. [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Heller myotomy versus endoscopic balloon dilatation for achalasia
• Titelzusatz: a single center experience
• Verf.angabe: Felix Nickel, MD, MME, Philip C. Müller, MD, Javier R. de la Garza, MD, Christian Tapking, MD, MMS, Laura Benner, MSc, Lars Fischer, MD, MBA, Daniel C. Steinemann, MD, Christian Rupp, MD, Georg R. Linke, MD, Beat P. Müller-Stich, MD
• E-Jahr: 2019
• Jahr: November 2019
• Umfang: 6 S.
• Fussnoten: Gesehen am 06.02.2020
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: Medicine
• Ort Quelle: Baltimore, Md. : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1922
• Jahr Quelle: 2019
• Band/Heft Quelle: 98(2019,44) Artikel-Nummer e17714, 6 Seiten
• ISSN Quelle: 1536-5964
• DOI: doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000017714
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• K10plus-PPN: 1688655573

Abstract

This study aimed to compare clinical results, symptom relief, quality of life and patient satisfaction after the 2 most common procedures for achalasia treatment: laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) and endoscopic balloon dilatation (EBD). - Patients treated at University Hospital of Heidelberg with LHM or EBD were included. A retrospective chart review of perioperative data and a prospective follow-up of therapeutic efficiency, Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) and patient satisfaction was conducted. - Follow-up data (mean follow-up: 75.1 ± 53.9 months for LHM group and 78.9 ± 45.6 months for EBD) were obtained from 36 patients (19 LHM; 17 EBD). Eckardt score (median (q1,q3): 2 (1,4) in both groups, P = .91, GIQLI (LHM: 117 (91.5, 126) vs EBD: 120 (116, 128), P = .495) and patient satisfaction (3 (2,3) vs 3 (2,4), P = .883) did not differ between groups. Fifteen patients (78.9%) in LHM group and 11 (64.7%) in EBD group (P = .562) stated they would undergo the intervention again. All patients with EBD had at least 2 dilatations (100%), whilst only 2 patients (10.5%) had dilatation after LHM (P < .001). There were no complications after EBD, but 2 after LHM (10.5%, P = .517). - Both LHM and EBD are able to control symptoms and provide similar quality of life and patient satisfaction. However, reintervention rate was higher following EBD, hence LHM provided a more sustained treatment than EBD.