Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024
Peroral endoscopic myotomy for spastic esophageal dysmotility among opioid users: a multicenter propensity score matching 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.
Fawwaz BahaAldeen Bani, Zhang Yiyang, Farooq Aimen, Gorrepati Venkata S, Forde Justin F, Canakis Andrew, Kim Raymond, Ma Michael, Benias Petros, Che Simon, Ujiki Michael B, Li Andrew A, Hwang Joo Ha, Eke Chiemeziem, Kedia Prashant, Yu Abraham, Inayat Irteza, Khalaf Mai, Othman Mohamed, Jawaid Salmaan, Hasan Muhammad K, Sharma Neil, Pomenti Sydney, Sethi Amrita, Draganov Peter V, Yang Dennis
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Opioid-induced esophageal dysfunction (OIED) often presents as spastic esophageal disorders (SEDs) and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO). The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare clinical outcomes of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for SEDs and EGJOO among opioid users and nonusers.
METHODS: This propensity score (PS) matching study included consecutive opioid users and nonusers who underwent POEM for SEDs and EGJOO between January 2018 and September 2022. The following covariates were used for the PS calculation: age, sex, duration of symptoms, Eckardt score, type of motility disorder, and length of myotomy during POEM. Clinical response was defined as a post-POEM Eckardt score ≤3.
RESULTS: A total of 277 consecutive patients underwent POEM during the study period. PS matching resulted in the selection of 64 pairs of patients strictly matched 1:1 (n = 128) with no statistically significant differences in demographic, baseline, or procedural characteristics or in the parameters considered for the PS between the 2 groups. Clinical response to POEM was significantly lower among opioid users (51 of 64 [79.7%]) versus nonusers (60 of 64 [93.8%]) (P = .03) at a median follow-up of 18 months. Among opioid users, higher opioid dose (>60 morphine milligram equivalents per day) was associated with a higher likelihood of failure to respond to POEM (odds ratio, 4.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-3.98; P = .02).
CONCLUSIONS: Clinical response to POEM for SEDs and EGJOO is significantly lower among opioid users versus nonusers. There was a dose-relationship between opioids and response to POEM, with higher daily opioid usage associated with a higher likelihood of treatment failure.
METHODS: This propensity score (PS) matching study included consecutive opioid users and nonusers who underwent POEM for SEDs and EGJOO between January 2018 and September 2022. The following covariates were used for the PS calculation: age, sex, duration of symptoms, Eckardt score, type of motility disorder, and length of myotomy during POEM. Clinical response was defined as a post-POEM Eckardt score ≤3.
RESULTS: A total of 277 consecutive patients underwent POEM during the study period. PS matching resulted in the selection of 64 pairs of patients strictly matched 1:1 (n = 128) with no statistically significant differences in demographic, baseline, or procedural characteristics or in the parameters considered for the PS between the 2 groups. Clinical response to POEM was significantly lower among opioid users (51 of 64 [79.7%]) versus nonusers (60 of 64 [93.8%]) (P = .03) at a median follow-up of 18 months. Among opioid users, higher opioid dose (>60 morphine milligram equivalents per day) was associated with a higher likelihood of failure to respond to POEM (odds ratio, 4.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-3.98; P = .02).
CONCLUSIONS: Clinical response to POEM for SEDs and EGJOO is significantly lower among opioid users versus nonusers. There was a dose-relationship between opioids and response to POEM, with higher daily opioid usage associated with a higher likelihood of treatment failure.