Discordance between high-resolution manometry, esophagoscopy and contrast esophagogram in determining landmarks for per-oral endoscopic myotomy in spastic esophageal disorders: a word of caution.

BACKGROUND

Myotomy length for per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is standardized for type I and II achalasia. However, for type III achalasia, jackhammer esophagus, diffuse esophageal spasms and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction, there is no standard. Determining myotomy length based on the high-pressure zone found during high-resolution manometry (HRM) and spastic length found during esophagography may be used to determine adequate myotomy length without excess muscle destruction.

METHODS

The records of patients who have undergone POEM procedures at our institution had the following data gleaned: age, sex, esophageal spastic diagnosis, length of high-pressure zone and lower esophageal sphincter (LES) position by HRM, length of spastic esophagus by esophagography, position of the z-line by esophagoscopy and length of myotomy performed. Outcomes were assessed based on patient symptomatic improvement and need for re-intervention.

RESULTS

71 patients were evaluated for POEM, with 67 completing POEM. There was an average difference in LES position by HRM and z-line position by esophagoscopy of 3.9 ± 3.0 cm. There was an average difference in high-pressure zone by HRM and spastic length by esophagography of 4.9 ± 3.2 cm. Overall, with a median of 20 months follow-up, 74% achieved long-term symptomatic improvement, with 17 patients requiring re-intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Discordance among HRM, esophagography and esophagoscopy can be significant. Caution should be employed with using these methods to determine myotomy length in POEM.