Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26716112›Full record

ArticleEndoscopy international open2015

The Per Oral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM) technique: how many preclinical procedures are needed to master it?

Oscar Víctor Hernández Mondragón, Dulce Maria Rascón Martínez, Aracely Muñoz Bautista, Maria Lourdes Altamirano Castañeda, Gerardo Blanco-Velasco, Juan Manuel Blancas Valencia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Endoscopy international open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. The Modern Age of POEM: the Past, Present and Future of Per-Oral Endoscopic Myotomy.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Oscar Víctor Hernández MondragónDepartment of Endoscopy, Specialties Hospital, National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
Dulce Maria Rascón MartínezDepartment of Anesthesiology and Biostatistics, Specialties Hospital, National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
Aracely Muñoz BautistaDepartment of Veterinarian Surgery, Specialties Hospital, National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
Maria Lourdes Altamirano CastañedaDepartment of Veterinarian Surgery, Specialties Hospital, National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
Gerardo Blanco-VelascoDepartment of Endoscopy, Specialties Hospital, National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
Juan Manuel Blancas ValenciaDepartment of Endoscopy, Specialties Hospital, National Medical Center Century XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY

aimPer oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a complex technique used in achalasia. Preclinical training is essential but little is known about the number of procedures needed. The aim of this study was to determine the number of procedures required to master POEM in an animal model. PATIENTS AND

methodsThis prospective comparative study was conducted in two swine models at a single institution in Mexico City between November 2012 and October 2014: Group 1 (G1) = 30 ex vivo and Group 2 (G2) = 20 live swine models. POEM was mastered after finishing the five steps without complications. Time, characteristics, and complications were recorded. Velocity of tunnelization and myotomy (VTM) was determined. Ex vivo analysis was done in G1 immediately after finishing POEM and at day 30 in G2.

resultsA total of 50 POEM were done in both groups (G1 = 30, G2 = 20). The mean times were 90.17 min (G1) and 89.50 min (G2) (P = 0.92). Myotomy was faster in G2 (21.10 vs 27.97 min; P = 0.009) with a slightly slower tunnelization (40.35 vs 41.13 min; P = 0.86). Myotomy was longer in G2 (9.25 vs 8.83 cm; P = 0.26). VTM between the groups was similar (G1 = 0.159 vs G2 = 0.157 cm/min; P = 0.925). Complications were: mucosotomy (G1 = 18 %, G2 = 8 %; P = 0.430), mediastinal perforation (G1 = 12 %, G2 = 8 %; P = 1.0), and perforation at the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) level (G1 = 16 %, G2 = 4 %; P = 0.149). Seven models in G2 presented minor bleeding and there was one death not attributed to the procedure. Mastery was obtained after 26 cases.

conclusionsWe suggest that centers interested in learning POEM consider 26 procedures in animal models to master it before performing it in patients with achalasia.

Identifiers

PMID26716112
PMCPMC4683141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.