ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
The incidence of reintervention and reoperation following Heller myotomy across multiple indications.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy an adequate anti-reflux operation after esophagogastric myotomy?Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Recurrent dysphagia after myotomy for achalasia: pneumatic dilation or POEM? : Which modality offers superior outcomes?Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Robotic redo Heller myotomy: how I do it?Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAchalasia is a debilitating primary esophageal motility disorder. Heller myotomy (HM) is a first-line therapy for the treatment of achalasia patients who have failed other modalities. Other indications for HM include diverticulum, diffuse esophageal spasm, and esophageal strictures. However, long-term outcomes of HM are unclear. This study aims to assess incidence of reintervention, either endoscopically or through minimally invasive or resectional procedures, in patients who underwent HM in New York State.
methodsThe Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) administrative longitudinal database identified 1817 adult patients who underwent HM between 2000 and 2008 for achalasia, esophageal diverticulum, diffuse esophageal spasm, and esophageal strictures, based on ICD-9 and CPT codes. Through the use of unique identifiers, patients requiring reintervention were tracked up to 2016 (for at least 8 years follow-up). Primary outcome was incidence of subsequent procedures following HM. Secondary outcomes were time to reintervention and risk factors for reintervention.
resultsOf the 1817 patients who underwent HM, 320 (17.6%) required subsequent intervention. Of the 320 patients, 234 (73.1%) underwent endoscopic reinterventions, 54 (16.9%) underwent minimally invasive procedures, and 32 (10%) underwent resectional procedures as their initial revisional intervention. Of the 234 patients who underwent endoscopic reintervention as their initial revisional procedure, only 40 (16.8%) required subsequent surgical procedures. Over a mean follow-up of 7.0 years, the mean time to a subsequent procedure was 4.3 ± 3.74 years. Reintervention rates after 10 years following HM for achalasia, diverticulum ,and other indication were 24.4%, 12.6%, and 37%, respectively.
conclusionThe majority of HM reinterventions were managed solely by endoscopic procedures (60.6%). Heller myotomy remains an excellent procedure to prevent surgical reintervention for achalasia and diverticulum.
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.