SynthesisMedicine2016
Surgery or Peroral Esophageal Myotomy for Achalasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 113 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term outcomes of peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis with median follow-up ≥ 5 years.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Comprehensive evaluation of current strategies in achalasia treatment: Insights from an umbrella review.Medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Long-term outcomes after per-oral endoscopic myotomy versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy in the treatment of achalasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Achalasia: laparoscopic Heller myotomy with fundoplication versus peroral endoscopic myotomy-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2024Pooled it
- Pneumatic balloon dilatation versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia: a failed attempt at meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Pooled it
- Updated Systematic Review of Achalasia, with a Focus on POEM Therapy.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2020Pooled it
- The 2 years' long-term efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: a systematic review.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Endoscopy versus radiology in post-procedural monitoring after peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM).Surgical endoscopy · 2018Trial
- Five-year follow-up results of the Italian case-control study comparing poem and laparoscopic Heller myotomy using the propensity score.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic Heller Myotomy for Achalasia: A Narrative Review of the State-of-the-Art Technique and Its Future Directions.Cureus · 2025Review
- Peroral endoscopic myotomy in children with achalasia: A review of the literature.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
- Review
- Endoscopic Management of GERD.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Review
- Adverse Events Associated With Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy Affecting Extended Hospital Stay: A Multi-center Retrospective Study in South Korea.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2022Article
- Peroral endoscopic myotomy is equally safe and highly effective treatment option in achalasia patients with both lower and higher ASA classification status.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2021Article
- Intraoperative impedance planimetry (EndoFLIP™) results and development of esophagitis in patients undergoing peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM).Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Establishment of a per oral endoscopic myotomy program at a rural tertiary care center.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Same-day discharge is safe and feasible following POEM surgery for esophageal motility disorders.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Long-term outcomes of per-oral endoscopic myotomy compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia: a single-center experience.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Poem Versus Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy in the Treatment of Esophageal Achalasia: A Case-Control Study from Two High Volume Centers Using the Propensity Score.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To date very few studies with small sample size have compared peroral esophageal myotomy (POEM) with the current surgical standard of care, laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM), in terms of efficacy and safety, and no recommendations have been proposed.To investigate the efficacy and safety of POEM compared with LHM, for the treatment of achalasia.The databases of Pubmed, Medline, Cochrane, and Ovid were systematically searched between January 1, 2005 and January 31, 2015, with the medical subject headings (MeSH) and keywords "achalasia," "POEM," "per oral endoscopic myotomy," and "peroral endoscopic myotomy," "laparoscopic Heller myotomy" (LHM), "Heller myotomy."All types of study designs including adult patients with diagnosis of achalasia were selected. Studies that did not report the comparison between endoscopic and surgical treatment, experimental studies in animal models, single case reports, technical reports, reviews, abstracts, and editorials were excluded.The total number of included patients was 486 (196 in POEM group and 290 in LHM group).There were no differences between POEM and LHM in reduction in Eckardt score (MD = -0.659, 95% CI: -1.70 to 0.38, P = 0.217), operative time (MD = -0.354, 95% CI: -1.12 to 0.41, P = 0.36), postoperative pain scores (MD = -1.86, 95% CI: -5.17 to 1.44, P = 0.268), analgesic requirements (MD = -0.74, 95% CI: -2.65 to 1.16, P = 0.445), and complications (OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.5-2.44, P = 0.796). Length of hospital stay was significantly lower for POEM (MD = -0.629, 95% CI: -1.256 to -0.002, P = 0.049). There was a trend toward significant reduction in symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux rate in favors of LHM compared to POEM group (OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.11-2.95, P = 0.017).All included studied were not randomized. Furthermore all selected studies did not report the results of follow-up longer than 1 year and most of them included patients who were both treatment naive and underwent previous endoscopic or surgical interventions for achalasia.POEM represents a safe and efficacy procedure comparable to the safety profile of LHM for achalasia at a short-term follow-up. Long-term clinical trials are urgently needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.