ArticleEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2022
Efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy in 100 older patients.
Article in Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, 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.
- Safety and efficacy of peroral endoscopic myotomy for treating achalasia in pediatric and geriatric patients: A meta-analysis.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024Article
- Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy for Achalasia in Older Adults: A Retrospective Analysis of 39 Cases with a Minimum Follow-Up of 5 Years.Dysphagia · 2023Article
- Clinical Outcomes and Complications for Achalasia Patients Admitted After Per-Oral Endoscopic Myotomy.Gastroenterology research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a standard treatment for achalasia. Several reports have described the efficacy and safety of POEM for elderly patients, but none has reported the efficacy and safety of POEM in a large number of elderly patients for > 3 years postoperatively. In this study, we examined the safety and outcome of POEM for 3 years postoperatively in 100 elderly patients.
methodsOne hundred consecutive patients aged > 65 years who underwent POEM from September 2011 to March 2020 were included in this study. In analysis 1, we retrospectively investigated the safety and efficacy of POEM in all patients. In analysis 2, the efficacy and safety of POEM were statistically compared between two groups: the early elderly (65-74 years of age, 55 patients) and late elderly (≥ 75 years of age, 45 patients).
resultsThe technical success rate of POEM was 100%. In analysis 1, the 3-month, 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year efficacies of POEM (Eckardt score of ≤ 3) were 100% (92/92 cases), 100% (91/91 cases), 97.8% (88/90 cases), and 100% (92/92 cases), respectively. Procedure-related adverse events occurred in 11% of patients, but none was fatal. Two late elderly patients developed aspiration pneumonia due to delirium and underwent long-term hospitalization. In analysis 2, there were no significant differences in the efficacy and safety of POEM between the two age groups.
conclusionsPOEM is effective and safe for elderly patients. However, precautions are needed regarding the risk of adverse events associated with delirium when POEM is performed in elderly patients.
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.