Surgical endoscopy · 2024
The safety and efficacy of endoscopic approaches for the management of Zenker's diverticulum: a multicentre retrospective study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Norton Benjamin, Siggens Katie, Papaefthymiou Apostolis, Telese Andrea, Duku Margaret, Murino Alberto, Johnson Gavin, Murray Charles, Mohammadi Borzoueh, Mughal Muntzer, Bisschops Raf, Bhandari Pradeep, Birchall Martin, Haidry Rehan
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive endoscopic options are safe and effective alternatives to surgery for the treatment of symptomatic Zenker's diverticulum (ZD). However, there is no consensus on the gold-standard approach. We compared the safety and efficacy of Zenker's peroral endoscopic myotomy (Z-POEM), flexible diverticulotomy (FD), and rigid diverticulotomy (RD) for the management of ZD.
METHODS: Patients undergoing treatment for ZD at three UK tertiary referral centres were identified and analysed between 2013 and 2023. Patient demographics, procedural details, clinical success, and 30-day adverse events (AE) were recorded. The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success defined as a fall in Dakkak and Bennett dysphagia score to ≤ 1 without re-intervention.
RESULTS: There was no difference in baseline characteristics amongst 126 patients undergoing intervention (50 RD, 31 FD, 45 Z-POEM). Technical success for RD, FD, and Z-POEM was 80%, 100%, and 100%, respectively (p < 0.001). Over a mean follow-up of 11.0 months (95% CI 8.2-13.9), clinical success amongst those treated was 85.3% (RD), 74.1% (FD), and 83.7% (Z-POEM; p = 0.48) with recurrence in 17.2% (RD), 20.0% (FD), and 8.3% (Z-POEM; p = 0.50). AEs were equivalent between groups (p = 0.98). During this time, 11 patients underwent surgical myotomy with low clinical success (36.4%) and high morbidity.
CONCLUSION: Endoscopic options for the treatment of ZD show equivalent rates of success, but failed RD often led to open myotomy with worse outcomes. Flexible endoscopic modalities are both safe and highly effective treatments that may be considered first-line in experienced centres and should be offered before surgery.
METHODS: Patients undergoing treatment for ZD at three UK tertiary referral centres were identified and analysed between 2013 and 2023. Patient demographics, procedural details, clinical success, and 30-day adverse events (AE) were recorded. The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success defined as a fall in Dakkak and Bennett dysphagia score to ≤ 1 without re-intervention.
RESULTS: There was no difference in baseline characteristics amongst 126 patients undergoing intervention (50 RD, 31 FD, 45 Z-POEM). Technical success for RD, FD, and Z-POEM was 80%, 100%, and 100%, respectively (p < 0.001). Over a mean follow-up of 11.0 months (95% CI 8.2-13.9), clinical success amongst those treated was 85.3% (RD), 74.1% (FD), and 83.7% (Z-POEM; p = 0.48) with recurrence in 17.2% (RD), 20.0% (FD), and 8.3% (Z-POEM; p = 0.50). AEs were equivalent between groups (p = 0.98). During this time, 11 patients underwent surgical myotomy with low clinical success (36.4%) and high morbidity.
CONCLUSION: Endoscopic options for the treatment of ZD show equivalent rates of success, but failed RD often led to open myotomy with worse outcomes. Flexible endoscopic modalities are both safe and highly effective treatments that may be considered first-line in experienced centres and should be offered before surgery.