ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Peroral endoscopic myotomy: a Danish single center 10-year follow-up study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 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
- Comparative long-term outcomes of Heller myotomy and peroral endoscopic myotomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic Heller's cardiomyotomy for achalasia cardia with a long term follow up: a 16-year experience in a single institution.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Robotic Heller's cardiomyotomy for achalasia cardia with a long term follow up: a 16-year experience in a single institution.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAchalasia is a rare esophageal motility disorder that in many cases can be treated effectively with Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM). However, long-term outcomes regarding clinical efficacy, patient satisfaction, and the prevalence of post-POEM gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains elusive and thus require further investigation.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study followed 63 patients treated for achalasia with POEM. Clinical success (Eckardt-score ≤ 3, and no subsequent treatments), GERD prevalence (GerdQ-score ≥ 8), and patient satisfaction were assessed via medical record reviews and telephone interviews. Statistical analyses identified risk factors for treatment failure, lower levels of satisfaction, and GERD.
resultsAt a median follow-up of 10 years, clinical success was 74%. The average Eckardt-score improved from 7,6 pre-POEM to 2,16 (p < 0.0001). The majority of treatment failures occurred within three months post-POEM, with no new failures after 5 years. GERD symptoms were reported by 33% of patients. Patient satisfaction was high with 91% reporting to be satisfied or very satisfied. Treatment-naïve patients had higher success rates (85%) compared to those with prior Heller's myotomy (40%, p < 0.0001). No other risk factors for clinical failure were found. RePOEM showed superior outcomes for salvage treatment compared to balloon dilation, botulinum toxin injections, and Heller's myotomy.
conclusionPOEM has a good and lasting efficacy at a median follow-up of 10 years. Clinical failure was not observed beyond 5 years post-POEM. The majority of patients were satisfied with POEM at follow-up. Symptomatic GERD was a highly experienced side effect at follow-up, however, not associated with lower levels of satisfaction.
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.