4.6 Article

Direct diverticular peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of thoracic esophageal diverticula: technique and outcomes

Journal

ENDOSCOPY
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/a-2182-5853

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Direct diverticular peroral endoscopic myotomy (DD-POEM) is a safe and effective technique for the management of thoracic esophageal diverticula. It simplifies the procedure and achieves excellent outcomes. Further evaluation is warranted to explore its potential in treating this disorder.
Background: Diverticular peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is an alternative to surgery for the management of symptomatic thoracic esophageal diverticula. Conventionally, this requires proximal tunnel formation but a direct approach may simplify the technique. Herein, we report the outcomes of direct diverticular-POEM (DD-POEM).Methods: We conducted a single-center prospective observational study evaluating DD-POEM. This involved a direct approach to the diverticulum. Success was defined as an Eckardt score of <= 3 without the need for reintervention.Results: 10 patients underwent DD-POEM (median age 72 years; interquartile range [IQR] 14.3; male 60 % [n = 6]). Median diverticulum size was 40 mm (IQR 7.5) and median location was 35 cm from the incisors (IQR 8.3). Five patients (50 %) had an underlying dysmotility disorder. The median procedure duration was 60 minutes (IQR 28.8). There were no adverse events. The median hospital stay was 1 day (IQR 0.75). The pre-procedure median Eckardt score of 6 (IQR 4) significantly improved to 0 (IQR 0.75; P < 0.001) at a median follow-up of 14.5 months (IQR 13.8). Success was achieved in all patients.Conclusions: DD-POEM was a safe technique for the management of thoracic esophageal diverticula. Owing to its simplicity and excellent performance it should be further evaluated for the treatment of this disorder.

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