SynthesisEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2021
Diverticular per oral endoscopic myotomy (DPOEM) for esophageal diverticular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of peroral endoscopic myotomy for Zenker's diverticulum: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Pooled it
- Recent advances in managing esophageal epiphrenic diverticula: a review of the impact of endoscopy, high-resolution manometry, and POEM.Clinical journal of gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Article
- Evolving Indications of Esophageal Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (E-POEM): A Review of Expanding Applications in Esophageal Pathologies.Current gastroenterology reports · 2025Review
- Taming type III achalasia and coexisting diverticula with complex surgical history with peroral endoscopic myotomy.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2025Article
- Modified diverticular peroral endoscopic myotomy with peridiverticular adhesiolysis and mucosal flap reconstruction.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2025Article
- Early esophageal cancer with mucosal bridging in the resting room: A case report.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Precision Endoscopy in Peroral Myotomies for Motility Disorders of the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract: Current Insights and Prospective Avenues-A Comprehensive Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Recurrence after Zenker's peroral endoscopic myotomy despite complete septotomy: how far to go with myotomy on the esophageal side.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2022Article
- Treatment of Achalasia and Epiphrenic Diverticulum.World journal of surgery · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The traditional way to tackle Zenker's diverticulum (ZD) has been flexible endoscopic septum division (FESD). Recently, the concept of per oral endoscopic myotomy has been found useful for managing diverticular diseases of the esophagus and has been termed DPOEM. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of D-POEM in diverticular disease of the esophagus and to compare it with FESD. We systematically searched PubMed and Embase, for studies reporting clinical success, technical success and adverse events in D-POEM alone or D-POEM comparing with FESD. We computed pooled prevalence for D-POEM alone and risk ratio for D-POEM vs FESD using random effect method with inverse variance approach. Subgroup analysis for ZD, non-ZD and mixed diverticulum was conducted. Totally 19 studies including 341 patients were identified reporting on D-POEM. The pooled clinical, technical success and adverse event rates for D-POEM were 87.07%, 95.19% and 10.22%, respectively. The clinical success was significantly better than FESD while the technical success, adverse event rate, procedure time and length of hospital stay were comparable with FESD. The recurrence rate was negligible for D-POEM compared to FESD. On subgroup analysis by dividing into three groups of ZD, non-ZD and mixed, there was no difference between clinical, technical success and adverse event rate among the three groups. D-POEM is an effective and safe technique among both ZD and non-ZD patients and has better clinical success than FESD.
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.