ArticleSurgical endoscopy2016
Factors predicting the technical difficulty of peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- A prediction model and nomogram for technical difficulty of peroral endoscopic myotomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Trial
- Characteristics and predictors of technically difficult peroral endoscopic myotomy in esophageal motility disorders: a high-volume center analysis of 676 procedures.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Peroral endoscopic myotomy for complex achalasia and the POEM difficulty score: An update.DEN open · 2025Article
- Safety and Efficacy of the Supine Position with the Right Shoulder Raised versus the Left Lateral Position in Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy for Achalasia: A Large-Sample Retrospective Study.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2022Article
- Novel triangle tip-jet knife increases efficiency in peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2021Article
- Feasibility of Speedboat RS2 with bipolar radiofrequency energy for peroral endoscopic myotomy in patients with achalasia (with video).Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Early experience with use of an endoscopic "hot" scissor-type knife for myotomy during per-oral endoscopic myotomy procedure.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2019Article
- POEM in the Treatment of Esophageal Disorders.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2018Review
- Comprehensive Analysis of Adverse Events Associated With Per Oral Endoscopic Myotomy in 1826 Patients: An International Multicenter Study.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2017Article
- Peroral endoscopic myotomy: procedural complications and pain management for the perioperative clinician.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2017Article
- Outcome of peroral endoscopic myotomy in achalasia cardia: Experience with a new triangular knife.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology AssociationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has been described as a novel treatment for esophageal achalasia. Owing to its technical difficulty, POEM is not widely performed. This study was aimed to prospectively assess the factor predicting technical difficulty of POEM in a single center with large volume cases.
methodsA total of 105 cases of achalasia treated by POEM from April 2011 to September 2014 were analyzed. Difficult cases of POEM were defined as procedure time ≥90 min and occurrence of adverse events, including mucosal perforation, pneumothorax, and major bleeding. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the predictive factors of difficult POEM.
resultsPOEM was successfully completed in all the patients, and no one was converted to laparoscopy. The number of cases with procedure time ≥90 min was 17. Mucosal perforations occurred in six (5.7 %) patients during submucosal tunnel creation, major bleeding occurred in seven (6.7 %) patients, and pneumothorax occurred in six (5.7 %) patients immediately after procedure. All the complications were managed conservatively. No other intraoperative and immediate postoperative complications, including infections and pneumoperitoneum, occurred. Multivariate analysis showed that early period (odds ratio [OR] 4.173, 95 % confidence interval [95 % CI] 1.36-6.829, P = 0.023) and triangular tip knife ([OR] 6.712, [95 % CI] 1.479-30.460, P = 0.014) were independent factors associated with technical difficulty regarding longer procedure time (procedure time ≥90 min).
conclusionPOEM is safe for the treatment of esophageal achalasia. Triangular tip knife and early period were independent risk factors for longer procedural time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26659228What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.