Safety and Efficacy of Peroral Endoscopic Shorter Myotomy versus Longer Myotomy for Patients with Achalasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Table 2
Details of the POEM procedures.
Study
Wang et al., 2015
Li et al., 2018
Huang et al., 2020
Gu et al., 2020
Nabi et al., 2020
Group
SM
SM
LM
SM
LM
SM
LM
SM
LM
Total patients (n)
46
63
63
36
74
46
48
34
37
Procedure time (minutes)
52 (30-120)
39.5 (21-74)
49.2 (23-120)
Myotomy direction, A/P
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0/46
0/48
34/0
37/0
Tunnel length (cm)
6.8 (4.0-10.0)
7.6 (6-8)
11.8 (10-14)
NR
NR
NR
NR
Myotomy length (cm)
E: 4.3 (3.0-5.5); G: 1.1 (1.0-2.0); and T: 5.4 (3.5-7.5)
E: 2.9 (2-4); G: 2.0 (1-3); and T: 4.8 (3-6)
E: 6.9 (5-9); G: 2.3 (2-4); and T: 9.2 (8-11)
E: ; G: ; and T:
E: ; G: ; and T:
T:
T:
E: ; G:
E: ; G:
Myotomy extent
SCM, 15; FTM, 31
PFTM, 56; SCM, 1; and FTM, 6
PFTM, 50; SCM, 5; and FTM, 8
NR
NR
SCM, 46
SCM, 48
FTM, 34
SCM and FTM, 37
Hospitalization (days)
2.9 (2-6)
NR
NR
Continuous variables presented as or median (IQR). SM: short myotomy; LM: long myotomy; NR: not reported; E: esophageal; G: gastric; T: total; A/P: anterior/posterior; SCM: selective circular myotomy; FTM: full thickness myotomy; PFTM: progressive full thickness myotomy; SD: standard deviation; IQR: interquartile range.
