ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Impact of hiatal hernia on periprocedural outcomes following peroral endoscopic myotomy: a nationwide retrospective study.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThe influence of hiatal hernia (HH) presence on peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) outcomes remains unclear. This study aimed to compare post-POEM outcomes between patients with and without HH.
methodsUsing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2016 through 2022, we identified 6572 patients undergoing POEM for achalasia or non-achalasia spastic disorders. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to compare adverse events, defined as any adverse event associated with an extended length of stay (> 3 days), reintervention, 30-day mortality, and length of stay between the groups.
resultsIn the propensity score-matched analysis involving 1276 pairs, the HH group had significantly higher rates of adverse events (8.4% vs 6.3%; p = 0.04) and reintervention (7.2% vs 5.3%; p = 0.04) compared to the non-HH group. The most common adverse events were infections, such as peritonitis and mediastinitis (4.9% vs 3.3%; p = 0.04). A longer length of stay (median: 4 vs 3 days; p < 0.01) was observed in the HH group. No significant difference in 30-day mortality was noted between the groups. On logistic regression analysis, HH (OR 1.36; 95% CI 1.06-1.68) and achalasia (vs. non-achalasia spastic disorders; OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.17-2.02) were associated with adverse events.
conclusionThe risk of adverse events and reintervention were higher in the HH group. These findings highlight the need for tailored management in POEM for HH cases. Further prospective studies are required to confirm these results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40676296What 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.