Peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia after failed pneumatic dilation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: POEM is a rescue endoscopic therapy for patients who had previously failed surgical or endoscopic treatment. However, data regarding its effectiveness after failed pneumatic dilation (PD) and its long-term effects are limited. We aimed to retrospectively investigate the long-term outcomes in patients who had undergone POEM after failed PD. METHODS: Data from 66 achalasia patients with a 2-year follow-up period were analyzed. Intraprocedural events were compared between the first POEM group (patients without prior-endoscopic intervention) and prior PD group (patients who had pre-POEM PD). Symptom evaluation, HRM and 24 h-pH DeMeester scores between the two groups were performed at 2 years after the POEM procedure. Muscularis externa samples were obtained from the lower esophagus using POEM to assess the muscle fibrosis with Azan-Mallory staining. RESULTS: POEM was successfully performed for all achalasia patients. During the 2-year follow-up period, the success rate of POEM was 96.15% (25/26) for patients with prior PD and 95% (38/40) with primary POEM. For patients with type II achalasia and who underwent prior PD, the post-procedure DeMeester score was higher compared to patients who underwent POEM only (P < 0.05). A larger number of patients who underwent primary POEM (27.50%, 11/40) complained of mild heartburn compared to patients who underwent POEM after PD (7.69%, 2/26) (P < 0.05). With regards to fibrosis, the majority of patients who underwent POEM only were classified as F-1 (45.00%, 18/40), while the majority of patients who underwent prior PD were classified as F-2 (42.3%, 11/26). The degree of fibrosis was significantly different between the two groups (P < 0.05). Both surgical time and prior PD were correlated with the degree of fibrosis (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the technical challenges, pre-POEM endoscopic treatment does not impact the safety and efficacy of POEM in achalasia patients. Longer follow-up studies using larger cohorts are needed to determine long-term outcomes and complications of POEM.

Hemostatic effect of topical hemocoagulase spray in digestive endoscopy.

AIM: To evaluate the hemostatic effect of topical hemocoagulase spray in digestive endoscopy. METHODS: Eighty-nine patients who developed oozing bleeding during endoscopic treatment from September 2014 to October 2014 at Center for Digestive Endoscopy, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital were randomly divided into either a study group (n = 39) or a control group (n = 50). The study group was given topical hemocoagulase spray intraoperatively, while the control group was given traditional 8% norepinephrine spray. Hemostatic efficacy was compared between the two groups. Bleeding site, wound cleanliness and perforation were recorded, and the rates of perforation and late bleeding were compared. RESULTS: Successful hemostasis was achieved in 39 (100%) patients of the study group and in 47 (94.0%) patients of the control group, and there was no significant difference in the rate of successful hemostasis between the two groups. Compared with the control group, after topical hemocoagulase spray in the study group, the surgical field was clearer, the bleeding site was more easily identified, and the wound was cleaner. There was no significant difference in the rate of perforation between the study and control groups (16.7% vs 35.0%, P = 0.477), but the rates of late bleeding (0% vs 15.8%, P = 0.048) and overall complications (P = 0.032) were significantly lower in the study group. CONCLUSION: Topical hemocoagulase spray has a definite hemostatic effect for oozing bleeding in digestive endoscopy, and this method is convenient, safe, and reliable. It is expected to become a new method for endoscopic hemostasis.