Objective: To compare the efficacy of, and complications from, the 2 main treatments for achalasia: endoscopic dilatation and surgical cardiomyotomy (Heller's myotomy).
Study design: We retrospectively collected data on children treated for achalasia over an 11-year period from 8 tertiary pediatric centers. A line of treatment was defined as performing either Heller's myotomy or 1-3 sessions of endoscopy dilatation over 3 months. Treatment success was a priori defined as clinical improvement and no need for new treatment.
Results: Ninety-seven children (median age, 12 years; 57% boys) were included. The median time to diagnosis was 10.5 months, and the median follow-up period was 27 months. Thirty-seven children were treated by Heller's myotomy and 60 by endoscopy dilatation as the first-line treatment. After adjustment for potentially confounding factors, Heller's myotomy was significantly more successful than endoscopy dilatation (hazard ratio, 3.93 [1.74; 8.88]; P = .001), with a median survival without failure of 49 and 7 months, respectively, and with no significant difference in the occurrence of complications (35.2% for Heller's myotomy, 29.7% for endoscopy dilatation, P = .56). Hydrostatic dilatation was as successful as pneumatic dilatation (hazard ratio, 1.35 [0.56; 3.23]; P = .50).
Conclusions: Heller's myotomy is more successful than endoscopy dilatation, with no significant difference in the occurrence of serious complications. This raises the potential role of peroral endoscopic myotomy as an alternative treatment to Heller's myotomy.
Keywords: Heller's myotomy; achalasia; children; endoscopic dilatation.
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.