ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Effectiveness and safety of full-thickness versus circular muscle myotomy in peroral endoscopic myotomy: a retrospective single-center analysis of 152 patients.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAchalasia is a primary esophageal motility disorder, which shows impaired relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and the absence of peristalsis, leading to dysphagia, weight loss, and chest pain. In recent years, peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has become a popular method for treating achalasia. However, the effectiveness and safety of full-thickness myotomy (FTM) versus circular muscle myotomy (CMM) in POEM require further investigation.
methodsThis retrospective single-center analysis studied 152 patients who underwent POEM surgery at the General Hospital of the Western Theater Command from May 2014 to May 2023. Patients were divided into two groups based on the depth of myotomy: the FTM group and the CMM group. Parameters such as surgical success rate, procedure time, and myotomy length were evaluated, and treatment efficacy was assessed based on the Eckardt score. Postoperative complications and efficacy were also monitored.
resultsTechnical success was achieved in both groups, with shorter procedure times in the FTM group (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in postoperative Eckardt scores and symptom improvement between the FTM and CMM groups. The incidence of adverse events was similar in both groups. The incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) seemed to be higher in the FTM group, although this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.051).
conclusionFor patients with achalasia, there were no significant differences in short-to-medium-term treatment efficacy and safety between FTM and CMM in POEM. Although FTM significantly reduced procedure time, it may lead to a higher incidence of GERD. More cases are needed in the future to explore the more appropriate myotomy for different achalasia subtypes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39806180What 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.