ArticleEndoscopy international open2026
Esophageal myotomy and risk of esophageal cancer and mortality in achalasia: Real-world cohort study.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Achalasia is associated with increased risk of esophageal cancer, particularly squamous cell carcinoma. Although esophageal myotomy improves dysphagia, its impact on cancer risk and mortality remains unclear. Patients and methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX research network, including adults (≥ 18 years) with achalasia confirmed by esophageal manometry. Patients were categorized based on treatment of those undergoing esophageal myotomy (peroral endoscopic myotomy [POEM] or laparoscopic Heller myotomy [LHM]) and those managed without myotomy. Patients with prior esophagectomy or malignancies associated with increased esophageal cancer risk were excluded. The primary outcome was incident esophageal cancer; secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality. Propensity score matching balanced baseline characteristics. Associations were assessed using adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and Cox proportional hazards models. Overall survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and compared with the log-rank test. Results: Among 18,186 patients with achalasia, 3,758 underwent esophageal myotomy and 14,428 were managed without myotomy. After matching, esophageal cancer incidence was low and did not differ significantly between the myotomy and non-myotomy cohorts (0.29% vs 0.27%; aOR 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-2.6). In contrast, myotomy was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (3.25% vs 7.22%; aOR 0.43, 95% CI 0.35-0.54). Independent predictors of esophageal cancer included male sex, older age, and personal history of gastrointestinal malignancy. Conclusions: In short-term follow-up, esophageal myotomy in achalasia was associated with lower all-cause mortality and similar esophageal cancer incidence. These findings suggest benefits beyond symptom control, including a potential survival advantage.
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.