4.6 Article

Clinical and financial outcomes of per-oral endoscopic myotomy compared to laparoscopic heller myotomy for treatment of achalasia

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09652-6

Keywords

Achalasia; Dysphagia; Symptomatic treatment; Laparoscopic Heller myotomy; Per-oral endoscopic myotomy

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compares perioperative and long-term outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and reimbursement for per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM). The results show that compared to LHM, POEM has shorter operative time and length of stay, longer myotomy length, and greater resolution of dysphagia symptoms. POEM costs are significantly lower than LHM, but reimbursement is poor.
Background Previous studies analyzing short-term outcomes for per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) have shown excellent clinical response rates and shorter operative times compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM). Despite this, many payors have been slow to recognize POEM as a valid treatment option. Furthermore, comparative studies analyzing long-term outcomes are limited. This study compares perioperative and long-term outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and reimbursement for POEM and LHM at a single institution. Methods Adult patients who underwent POEM or LHM between 2014 and 2021 and had complete preoperative data with at least one complete follow up, were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic data, success rate, operative time, myotomy length, length of stay, pre- and postoperative symptom scores, anti-reflux medication use, cost and reimbursement were compared. Results 58 patients met inclusion with 25 undergoing LHM and 33 undergoing POEM. There were no significant differences in preoperative characteristics. Treatment success (Eckardt <= 3) for POEM and LHM was achieved by 88% and 76% of patients, respectively (p = 0.302). POEM patients had a shorter median operative time (106 min. vs. 145 min., p = 0.003) and longer median myotomy length (11 cm vs. 8 cm, p < 0.001). All LHM patients had a length of stay (LOS) >= 1 day vs. 51.5% for POEM patients (p < 0.001). Both groups showed improvements in dysphagia, heartburn, regurgitation, Eckardt score, GERD HRQL, RSI, and anti-reflux medication use. The improvement in dysphagia score was greater in patients undergoing POEM (2.30 vs 1.12, p = 0.003). Median hospital reimbursement was dramatically less for POEM ($3,658 vs. $14,152, p = 0.002), despite median hospital costs being significantly lower compared to LHM ($2,420 vs. $3,132, p = 0.029). Results POEM is associated with a shorter operative time and LOS, longer myotomy length, and greater resolution of dysphagia compared to LHM. POEM costs are significantly less than LHM but is poorly reimbursed. [GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT]

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available