Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy

OPEN ACCESS

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Clin Endosc > Volume 55(6); 2022 > Article
Letter to the Editor Peroral endoscopic myotomy versus Heller’s myotomy for achalasia hospitalizations in the United States: what does the future hold?
Dushyant Singh Dahiya1,orcid, Vinay Jahagirdar2orcid, Manesh Kumar Gangwani3orcid, Muhammad Aziz4orcid, Chin-I Cheng5orcid, Sumant Inamdar6orcid, Madhusudhan R. Sanaka7orcid, Mohammad Al-Haddad8orcid
Clinical Endoscopy 2022;55(6):826-828.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2022.283
Published online: November 3, 2022

1Department of Internal Medicine, Central Michigan University College of Medicine, Saginaw, MI, USA

2Department of Internal Medicine, University of Missouri Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, MO, USA

3Department of Internal Medicine, The University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, USA

4Department of Gastroenterology, The University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, USA

5Department of Statistics, Actuarial and Data Science, Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, MI, USA

6Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA

7Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA

8Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA

Correspondence: Dushyant Singh Dahiya Department of Internal Medicine, Central Michigan University College of Medicine, 1000 Houghton Ave, Saginaw, MI 48603, USA E-mail: dush.dahiya@gmail.com
• Received: October 11, 2022   • Accepted: October 24, 2022

Copyright © 2022 Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • 1,842 Views
  • 116 Download
prev
Achalasia is a rare neurodegenerative motility disorder of the esophagus characterized by ineffective lower esophageal sphincter relaxation and the absence of organized peristalsis leading to dysphagia.1 First described in the early 1990s, Heller’s myotomy (HM) is the gold standard treatment of choice for achalasia.2 However, peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), a minimally invasive endoscopic technique, has gained immense popularity for the management of achalasia since its inception in Japan in 2008.3 It has also been widely endorsed by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in clinical practice.3 Although numerous studies have been performed to compare the efficacy and safety of POEM and HM, there continues to be a significant paucity of data for achalasia hospitalizations that undergo either POEM or HM at a national level.
We analyzed the National Inpatient Sample to identify all adult (≥18 years) achalasia patients admitted to the hospital after POEM or HM in the United States from 2016 to 2019. Hospitalization characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between the POEM and HM cohorts. SAS ver. 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) was used for statistical analysis and p-values ≤0.05 were considered statistically significant.
A total of 1,885 and 11,150 achalasia patients were admitted to the hospital after POEM and HM, respectively, primarily at large urban teaching hospitals (Table 1). We did not find a statistically significant difference in the mean age between the POEM and HM cohorts (57.6 vs. 56.7 years, p=0.14). A significant Caucasian predominance was noted in both subgroups. Although achalasia hospitalizations that underwent POEM and were admitted to the hospital after had a higher comorbidity burden, we did not find a statistical difference in the mean length of stay (3.7 vs. 3.4 days, p=0.36) and mean total healthcare charge ($66,151 vs. $65,468, p=0.77) between the two groups. Furthermore, inpatient mortality was not observed in the POEM cohort. However, the all-cause inpatient mortality rate in the HM cohort was 0.002% (30 patients) (Table 1).
Our data reflect an overall excellent safety profile and similar recovery times and costs associated with POEM and the gold standard procedure for the management of achalasia, HM. However, even though patients who underwent POEM had a higher comorbidity burden, the all-cause inpatient mortality in the POEM cohort was 0% compared to 0.002% (30 patients) in the HM cohort. Hence, POEM may be a less invasive and safer alternative for the management of achalasia in patients with more comorbidities. Further prospective multicenter studies are needed to investigate these findings.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no potential conflicts of interest.

Funding

None.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: DSD, SI, MRS, MAH; Data curation: DSD, CIC; Formal analysis: CIC; Investigation: all authors; Methodology: all authors; Project administration: all authors; Resources: DSD, CIC; Software: CIC; Supervision: DSD, MAH; Validation: all authors; Visualization: all authors; Writing–original draft: all authors; Writing–review & editing: all authors.

Table 1.
Comparative analysis of hospitalization characteristics and clinical outcomes for peroral endoscopic myotomy and Heller’s myotomy for achalasia hospitalizations in the United States from 2016 to 2019
Variable Peroral endoscopic myotomy Heller’s myotomy p-value
Total no. of hospitalizations 1,885 11,150
Mean age (yr) 57.58 56.73 0.40
Age groups (yr) 0.14
 18–34 285 (15.1) 1,365 (12.2)
 35–49 305 (16.2) 2,175 (19.5)
 50–64 540 (28.6) 3,485 (31.3)
 65–79 600 (31.8) 3,440 (30.9)
 ≥80 155 (8.2) 685 (6.1)
Sex 0.66
 Male 935 (49.6) 5,395 (48.4)
 Female 950 (50.4) 5,755 (51.6)
Race 0.83
 White 1,245/1,820 (68.4) 7,260/10,590 (68.6)
 Black 270/1,820 (14.8) 1,540/10,590 (14.5)
 Hispanic 175/1,820 (9.6) 1,170/10,590 (11.0)
 Asian 50/1,820 (2.7) 275/10,590 (2.6)
 Other 80/1,820 (4.4) 345/10,590 (3.3)
Charlson comorbidity index 0.002
 0 1,060 (56.2) 6,690 (60.0)
 ≥1 825 (43.8) 4,460 (40.0)
Hospital region <0.001
 Northeast 635 (33.7) 1,995 (17.9)
 Midwest 405 (21.5) 2,280 (20.4)
 South 610 (32.4) 4,405 (39.5)
 West 235 (12.5) 2,470 (22.2)
Hospital bed size <0.001
 Small 45 (2.4) 1,085 (9.7)
 Medium 215 (11.4) 2,250 (20.2)
 Large 1,625 (86.2) 7,815 (70.1)
Hospital location and teaching status <0.001
 Rural 10 (0.5) 180 (1.6)
 Urban non-teaching 60 (3.2) 1,100 (9.9)
 Urban teaching 1,815 (96.3) 9,870 (88.5)
Expected primary payer 0.98
 Medicare 825 (43.8) 4,730 (42.4)
 Medicaid 215 (11.4) 1,230 (11.0)
 Private 740 (39.3) 4,565 (40.9)
 Self-pay 50 (2.7) 250 (2.2)
 Other 55 (2.9) 340 (3.0)
Median household income (quartile) 0.0015
 1st (0–25th) 440/1,860 (23.7) 3,170/10.990 (28.8)
 2nd (26th –50th) 510/1,860 (27.4) 2,660/10.990 (24.2)
 3rd (51st –75th) 395/1,860 (21.2) 3,010/10.990 (27.4)
 4th (76th –100th) 515/1,860 (27.7) 2,150/10.990 (19.6)
Length of stay (day) 3.68 3.37 0.36
Total hospital charge (United States dollar) 66,151 65,468 0.77
Inpatient mortality 0 (0) 30 (0.002) -

Values are presented as number (%).

  • 1. Kahrilas PJ, Bredenoord AJ, Fox M, et al. The Chicago Classification of esophageal motility disorders, v3.0. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2015;27:160–174.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 2. Shimi S, Nathanson LK, Cuschieri A. Laparoscopic cardiomyotomy for achalasia. J R Coll Surg Edinb 1991;36:152–154.PubMed
  • 3. Inoue H, Minami H, Kobayashi Y, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia. Endoscopy 2010;42:265–271.ArticlePubMed

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  

      • PubReader PubReader
      • ePub LinkePub Link
      • Cite
        CITE
        export Copy Download
        Close
        Download Citation
        Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

        Format:
        • RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
        • BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software
        Include:
        • Citation for the content below
        Peroral endoscopic myotomy versus Heller’s myotomy for achalasia hospitalizations in the United States: what does the future hold?
        Clin Endosc. 2022;55(6):826-828.   Published online November 3, 2022
        Close
      • XML DownloadXML Download
      Related articles
      Peroral endoscopic myotomy versus Heller’s myotomy for achalasia hospitalizations in the United States: what does the future hold?
      Peroral endoscopic myotomy versus Heller’s myotomy for achalasia hospitalizations in the United States: what does the future hold?
      Variable Peroral endoscopic myotomy Heller’s myotomy p-value
      Total no. of hospitalizations 1,885 11,150
      Mean age (yr) 57.58 56.73 0.40
      Age groups (yr) 0.14
       18–34 285 (15.1) 1,365 (12.2)
       35–49 305 (16.2) 2,175 (19.5)
       50–64 540 (28.6) 3,485 (31.3)
       65–79 600 (31.8) 3,440 (30.9)
       ≥80 155 (8.2) 685 (6.1)
      Sex 0.66
       Male 935 (49.6) 5,395 (48.4)
       Female 950 (50.4) 5,755 (51.6)
      Race 0.83
       White 1,245/1,820 (68.4) 7,260/10,590 (68.6)
       Black 270/1,820 (14.8) 1,540/10,590 (14.5)
       Hispanic 175/1,820 (9.6) 1,170/10,590 (11.0)
       Asian 50/1,820 (2.7) 275/10,590 (2.6)
       Other 80/1,820 (4.4) 345/10,590 (3.3)
      Charlson comorbidity index 0.002
       0 1,060 (56.2) 6,690 (60.0)
       ≥1 825 (43.8) 4,460 (40.0)
      Hospital region <0.001
       Northeast 635 (33.7) 1,995 (17.9)
       Midwest 405 (21.5) 2,280 (20.4)
       South 610 (32.4) 4,405 (39.5)
       West 235 (12.5) 2,470 (22.2)
      Hospital bed size <0.001
       Small 45 (2.4) 1,085 (9.7)
       Medium 215 (11.4) 2,250 (20.2)
       Large 1,625 (86.2) 7,815 (70.1)
      Hospital location and teaching status <0.001
       Rural 10 (0.5) 180 (1.6)
       Urban non-teaching 60 (3.2) 1,100 (9.9)
       Urban teaching 1,815 (96.3) 9,870 (88.5)
      Expected primary payer 0.98
       Medicare 825 (43.8) 4,730 (42.4)
       Medicaid 215 (11.4) 1,230 (11.0)
       Private 740 (39.3) 4,565 (40.9)
       Self-pay 50 (2.7) 250 (2.2)
       Other 55 (2.9) 340 (3.0)
      Median household income (quartile) 0.0015
       1st (0–25th) 440/1,860 (23.7) 3,170/10.990 (28.8)
       2nd (26th –50th) 510/1,860 (27.4) 2,660/10.990 (24.2)
       3rd (51st –75th) 395/1,860 (21.2) 3,010/10.990 (27.4)
       4th (76th –100th) 515/1,860 (27.7) 2,150/10.990 (19.6)
      Length of stay (day) 3.68 3.37 0.36
      Total hospital charge (United States dollar) 66,151 65,468 0.77
      Inpatient mortality 0 (0) 30 (0.002) -
      Table 1. Comparative analysis of hospitalization characteristics and clinical outcomes for peroral endoscopic myotomy and Heller’s myotomy for achalasia hospitalizations in the United States from 2016 to 2019

      Values are presented as number (%).


      Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy Twitter Facebook
      Close layer
      TOP