Superior clinical outcomes of peroral endoscopic myotomy compared with balloon dilation in all achalasia subtypes

摘要

Abstract Background and Aim Optimal treatment modalities for each of the three subtypes of achalasia are still under debate. Differences in prognosis and long‐term outcomes between peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and balloon dilation (BD) are also unclear. We aimed to compare the treatment outcomes of BD and POEM in each subtype of achalasia by using information from the manometry database of a tertiary referral center in Korea. Methods Data from 5207 esophageal manometry procedures performed between 1989 and 2016 were analyzed. The medical records and results of esophagography and esophagogastroduodenoscopy were also reviewed. Results We identified 264 patients (116 men and 148 women) with diagnosis of achalasia during the study period. POEM and BD were carried out on 64 and 177 patients, respectively. There was a significant difference in the time to relapse between the POEM group and the BD group ( P ?=?0.002). At the 24‐month follow‐up, the clinical success rates of POEM and BD were 91.8% and 68.0%, respectively. The hazard ratio of symptom return was 6.54 for BD compared with POEM (95% confidence interval 2.12–20.22, P ?=?0.001). After a follow‐up period of 24?months, the success rate of POEM was significantly higher than that of BD for all subtypes of achalasia. However, only that of types I and II was statistically significant (type 1: 92.0% vs 51.1%, P ?=?0.004; type 2: 92.3% vs 59.8%, P ?=?0.007; and type3: 91.7% vs 55.6%, P ?=?0.051). Conclusions Peroral endoscopic myotomy was more effective than BD in providing mid‐long‐term remission in patients with all manometric subtypes of achalasia.