ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Laparoscopic Heller-Dor as salvage therapy after failed POEM: a prospective comparative study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesCurrent therapeutic options for esophageal achalasia (EA) include pneumatic dilation (PD), laparoscopic Heller-Dor myotomy (LHD), and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), which has gained increasing popularity over the last decade. However, symptoms persist or recur after POEM in 10-20% of cases. Evidence on management of POEM failures is limited to small case series. This study evaluates the outcome of LHD in patients who previously underwent endoscopic treatment-POEM or PD-as compared to treatment-naïve patients.
methodsConsecutive patients with EA who underwent LHD between 2020 and 2025 were prospectively recorded. The study population was divided in three groups: treatment-naïve (NA group), prior POEM (POEM group), and prior PD (PD group). Primary outcomes were morbidity, mortality, and therapeutic success. Secondary outcomes included postoperative IRP and postprocedural reflux. Treatment failure was defined as the persistence or reoccurrence of an Eckardt score > 3 or the need for retreatment.
resultsA total of 577 patients were included: 498 in the NA group, 15 in the POEM group and 64 in the PD group. Intraoperative mucosal perforation occurred similarly (p = 0.65). No mortality was recorded. The median follow-up was 30 months (IQR: 22-34). Treatment success was significantly lower after prior POEM (80%) compared with naïve (98.6%) and PD group (95.3%) (p < 0.001). Abnormal postoperative acid exposure was more frequent after prior POEM (33.3%) (p < 0.01). In selected patients with recurrence, endoscopic ultrasound revealed marked esophageal wall fibrosis.
conclusionsLHD is safe and effective even after failed endoscopic therapy. However, patients previously treated with POEM represent a higher-risk subgroup with lower success rates and increased reflux.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42618821What 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.