Comparing cost and outcomes between peroral endoscopic myotomy and laparoscopic heller myotomy

Background: Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has previously been shown to be equally if not more expensive than laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM). We compare perioperative outcomes and charges between POEM and LHM at a single institution. Methods: Outcomes and charge data of 33 patients who underwent LHM and 126 patients who underwent POEM were analyzed. Patients who did not present electively were excluded. Results: There were no demographic differences between groups. Patients who underwent POEM had a significantly shorter mean operative time and median length of stay (both p < 0.001). Patients who underwent POEM stopped narcotics earlier and had faster return to activities of daily living (both p < 0.05). When adjusted for inflation, POEM incurred less in hospital charges than LHM (35.5 +/- 12.8 vs 30.7 +/- 10.3 in thousands of US dollars, p = 0.006). Conclusions: Patients who underwent POEM compared to LHM had significantly better perioperative outcomes. Our results suggest POEM may be the more cost-effective option. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

In comparison between peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) at a single institution, POEM patients had shorter operative time and length of stay, quicker recovery, and lower hospital charges, suggesting that POEM may be more cost-effective.