Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/36293
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorSistema FMUSP-HC: Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP) e Hospital das Clínicas da FMUSP
dc.contributor.authorFARIAS, Galileu F. A.
dc.contributor.authorMOURA, Diogo T. H. de
dc.contributor.authorMOURA, Eduardo T. H. de
dc.contributor.authorREZENDE, Daniel T. de
dc.contributor.authorHATHORN, Kelly E.
dc.contributor.authorNASI, Ary
dc.contributor.authorQUEIROZ, Natalia S. F.
dc.contributor.authorMOURA, Eduardo G. H. de
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-01T15:03:22Z-
dc.date.available2020-06-01T15:03:22Z-
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.citationENDOSCOPY INTERNATIONAL OPEN, v.8, n.4, p.E506-E512, 2020
dc.identifier.issn2364-3722
dc.identifier.urihttps://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/36293-
dc.description.abstractBackground and study aims Achalasia can be classified as either primary (idiopathic) achalasia or secondary achalasia, which is a consequence of another systemic disease. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is an effective and safe treatment for achalasia. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of POEM in patients with Chagasic achalasia compared to idiopathic achalasia. Patients and methods We evaluated POEM procedures performed at a single institution from November 2016 to January 2018. Demographic data, Eckardt score, lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, body mass index, post-operative erosive esophagitis, adverse events, length of hospital stay, and procedure-related parameters were analyzed. Results Fifty-one patients underwent POEM as a treatment for achalasia in this period (20 patients with Chagasic and 31 with Idiopathic etiology). The overall clinical success rate was 92.1 %, with no statistical difference between groups (90 % in the Chagasic group vs. 93.5 % in the Idiopathic group, P = 0.640). Both groups had significant reduction in Eckardt score and in LES pressure, and increase in bodey mass index (BMI) at 1-year follow-up. There was no statistical difference between groups regarding Eckardt score ( P = 0.439), LES pressure (p = 0.507), BMI ( P = 0.254), post erosive esophagitis (35 % vs. 38.7 %, P = 0.789), adverse events (30 % vs. 12 %, P = 0.163,) length of hospital stay (3.75 days vs. 3.58 days, P = 0.622), and operative time (101.3 min vs. 99.1 min, P = 0.840). Conclusion POEM is an effective and safe treatment for patients with achalasia. There is no difference in POEM outcomes for those patients with Chagasic or Idiopathic achalasia.eng
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherGEORG THIEME VERLAG KGeng
dc.relation.ispartofEndoscopy International Open
dc.rightsopenAccesseng
dc.subject.otheradverse eventseng
dc.subject.othermanagementeng
dc.subject.otherdiagnosiseng
dc.titlePeroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM): a comparative study between Chagasic and idiopathic achalasiaeng
dc.typearticleeng
dc.rights.holderCopyright GEORG THIEME VERLAG KGeng
dc.identifier.doi10.1055/a-1035-9288
dc.identifier.pmid32258372
dc.subject.wosGastroenterology & Hepatologyeng
dc.type.categoryoriginal articleeng
dc.type.versionpublishedVersioneng
hcfmusp.author.externalHATHORN, Kelly E.:Harvard Med Sch, Div Gastroenterol Hepatol & Endoscopy, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Boston, MA 02115 USA
hcfmusp.description.beginpageE506
hcfmusp.description.endpageE512
hcfmusp.description.issue4
hcfmusp.description.volume8
hcfmusp.origemWOS
hcfmusp.origem.idWOS:000526689000007
hcfmusp.publisher.citySTUTTGARTeng
hcfmusp.publisher.countryGERMANYeng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBarbieri LA, 2015, UNITED EUR GASTROENT, V3, P325, DOI 10.1177/2050640615581732eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBoeckxstaens GE, 2008, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V103, P1610, DOI 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.01967.xeng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBoeckxstaens GE, 2014, LANCET, V383, P83, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60651-0eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBonifacio P, 2019, DIS ESOPHAGUS, V32, DOI 10.1093/dote/doy105eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceCotton PB, 2010, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V71, P446, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2009.10.027eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceDEOLIVEIRA RB, 1995, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V90, P1119eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceEckardt V F, 2001, Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am, V11, P281eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceECKARDT VF, 1992, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V103, P1732, DOI 10.1016/0016-5085(92)91428-7eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceGao QP, 2017, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V112, pS173, DOI 10.14309/00000434-201710001-00316eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceInoue H, 2010, ENDOSCOPY, V42, P265, DOI 10.1055/s-0029-1244080eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceKahaleh M, 2019, J CLIN GASTROENTEROL, V53, pE352, DOI 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001161eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceKhashab MA, 2017, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V85, P228, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2016.06.048eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceLundell LR, 1999, GUT, V45, P172, DOI 10.1136/gut.45.2.172eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMartinek J, 2018, SURG ENDOSC, V32, P1293, DOI 10.1007/s00464-017-5807-3eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMayberry J F, 2001, Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am, V11, P235eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceNabi Z, 2018, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V87, P4, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2017.09.029eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceRamchandani M, 2018, J GASTROEN HEPATOL, V33, P1436, DOI 10.1111/jgh.14097eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceREYNOLDS JC, 1989, GASTROENTEROL CLIN N, V18, P223eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceRezende JM, 1982, REV GOIANA MED, V28, P187eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceRosner B, 1986, FUNDAMENTALS BIOSTAT, P584eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSpiess AE, 1998, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V280, P638, DOI 10.1001/jama.280.7.638eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceTimm N H, 1975, MULTIVARIATE ANAL AP, P687eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceTRONCON LEA, 1993, DIGEST DIS SCI, V38, P1511, DOI 10.1007/BF01308613eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceVaezi MF, 2013, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V108, P1238, DOI 10.1038/ajg.2013.196eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceWinter H., 2015, British Journal of Medical Practitioners, V8, pa810eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceWu QN, 2017, ENDOSCOPY, V49, P736, DOI 10.1055/s-0043-113440eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceYu L, 2010, DIS ESOPHAGUS, V23, P277, DOI 10.1111/j.1442-2050.2009.01031.xeng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceZaninotto G, 2018, DIS ESOPHAGUS, V31, DOI 10.1093/dote/doy071eng
dc.description.indexPubMedeng
dc.identifier.eissn2196-9736
Appears in Collections:

Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Instituto Central - HC/ICHC

Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/Outros
Outros institutos - HC/Outros

Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/35
LIM/35 - Laboratório de Nutrição e Cirurgia Metabólica do Aparelho Digestivo


Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
art_FARIAS_Peroral_endoscopic_myotomy_POEM_a_comparative_study_between_2020.PDFpublishedVersion (English)637.53 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.