Review Article
An Updated Meta-analysis: Similar Clinical Efficacy of Anterior and Posterior Approaches in Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM) for Achalasia
Table 1
Characteristics of included studies.
| | Study | Country | Type of study | Site of myotomy | Age, mean/median (range/SD) | Patients() | Gender (male/female) | Follow-up (months) | Achalasia(I/II/III) | Course of disease (months) |
| | Hungness et al. [26] | USA | Retrospective (cohort) | Anterior | 52.9 (18) | 112 | 68/44 | 29 (11) | 25/58/20 | NA | | Shiwaku et al. [27] | Japan | Prospective (cohort) | Anterior | 48.8 (18.8) | 70 | 41/29 | NA | 6/55/9 | NA | | Tang et al. [28] | China | Retrospective (cohort) | Anterior | 34.9 (7.7) | 22 | 14/8 | 12 | 5/17/0 | 6.4 (5.4) | | 38.5 (11.3) | 39 | 20/19 | 13/26/0 | 6.5 (4.8) | | Ward et al. [29] | USA | Prospective (cohort) | Anterior | 63.0 (17.9) | 41 | 25/16 | 12 | NA | 81.6 (117.6) | | Werner et al. [30] | Germany, etc. | Retrospective (cohort) | Anterior | 44.9 (9–88) | 80 | 43/37 | 29 (24–41) | 24/48/5 | NA | | Zheng et al. [31] | China | Retrospective (cohort) | Anterior | 32.5 (8.36) | 26 | 14/12 | 12 | 11/15/0 | 22.31 (8.31) | | de Pascale et al. [32] | Italy | Retrospective (cohort) | Posterior | 56 (18–83) | 32 | 20/12 | 23.7 (12–46.2) | 0/31/1 | 36 (6.0–312) | | Duan et al. [33] | China | Retrospective (cohort) | Posterior | 43 (14) | 70 | 33/37 | 30 (24-46) | 12/51/7 | 60.0 (6.0–396.0) | | 41 (13) | 53 | 30/23 | 9/39/5 | 54.0 (6.0–240.0) | | Farias et al. [34] | Brazil | Retrospective (cohort) | Posterior | 53.70 (11.74) | 20 | 9/11 | 12 | NA | NA | | 44.61 (14.80) | 31 | 15/16 | 12 | NA | NA | | Guo et al. [35] | China | Retrospective (cohort) | Posterior | 40.7 (15.3) | 67 | 36/31 | 40.1 (2.8) | 13/50/4 | 94.7 (95.5) | | Meng et al. [36] | China | Retrospective (cohort) | Posterior | 44.8 (11.6) | 32 | 13/19 | 25 (11) | 5/18/9 | 24 (12–60) | | Peng et al. [37] | China | Retrospective (cohort) | Posterior | 37.5 (13.0) | 13 | 8/5 | 46.2 (4.1) | NA | 46.8 (33.6) | | Tyberg et al. [38] | USA, etc. | Prospective (cohort) | Posterior | 54.2 | 51 | 24/27 | 24.4 (12–52) | 13/29/6 | 134.4 | | Wang et al. [39] | China | Retrospective (cohort) | Posterior | 67.9 (4.3) | 21 | 12/9 | 21.8 | 5/16/0 | 166.8 (140.4) | | Zhang and Linghu [40] | China | Retrospective (cohort) | Posterior | 43.3 (16–79) | 32 | 16/16 | 27 (24–51) | 0/0/32 | 24.0 (2.4–336.0) | | Ramchandani et al. [41] | India | RCT | Anterior | 38 (13.5) | 30 | 15/15 | 6 | 5/21/4 | 22.2 (28.1) | | Posterior | 43.9 (15.7) | 30 | 18/12 | | 6/21/3 | 35.6 (37.6) | | Stavropoulos et al. [42] | USA | RCT | Anterior | 54.2 (2) | 101 | 52/49 | NA | 22/58/21 | NA | | Posterior | 54.8 (1.8) | 114 | 60/54 | NA | 36/56/22 | NA | | Tan et al. [43] | China | RCT | Anterior | 45.8 (12.2) | 31 | 15/16 | 15.8 (3.8) | 4/26/1 | 80.4 (80.4) | | Posterior | 42.4 (13.3) | 32 | 14/18 | 15.1 (3.9) | 3/28/1 | 74.4 (86.4) | | Ichkhanian et al. [44] | USA, etc. | Prospective (cohort) | Anterior | 52.3 (21) | 54 | 29/25 | 34.5 (6.9) | 13/33/8 | 53.3 (61.4) | | Posterior | 51.2 (18) | 57 | 23/34 | 32.5 (5.2) | 4/42/11 | 50.5 (59.9) |
|
|
