Suppr超能文献

贲门失弛缓症的治疗结果取决于测压亚型。

Outcomes of treatment for achalasia depend on manometric subtype.

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Gastroenterology. 2013 Apr;144(4):718-25; quiz e13-4. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.12.027. Epub 2012 Dec 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with achalasia are treated with either pneumatic dilation (PD) or laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM), which have comparable rates of success. We evaluated whether manometric subtype was associated with response to treatment in a large population of patients treated with either PD or LHM (the European achalasia trial).

METHODS

Esophageal pretreatment manometry data were collected from 176 patients who participated in the European achalasia trial. Symptoms (weight loss, dysphagia, retrosternal pain, and regurgitation) were assessed using the Eckardt score; treatment was considered successful if the Eckardt score was 3 or less. Manometric tracings were classified according to the 3 Chicago subtypes.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients had achalasia type I (25%), 114 patients had achalasia type II (65%), and 18 patients had achalasia type III (10%). After a minimum follow-up period of 2 years, success rates were significantly higher among patients with type II achalasia (96%) than type I achalasia (81%; P < .01, log-rank test) or type III achalasia (66%; P < .001, log-rank test). The success rate of PD was significantly higher than that of LHM for patients with type II achalasia (100% vs 93%; P < .05), but LHM had a higher success rate than PD for patients with type III achalasia (86% vs 40%; P = .12, difference was not statistically significant because of the small number of patients). For type I achalasia, LHM and PD had similar rates of success (81% vs 85%; P = .84).

CONCLUSIONS

A higher percentage of patients with type II achalasia (based on manometric tracings) are treated successfully with PD or LHM than patients with types I and III achalasia. Success rates in type II are high for both treatment groups but significantly higher in the PD group. Patients with type III can probably best be treated by LHM. Trialregister.nl number NTR37; ISRCTN56304564.

摘要

背景与目的

贲门失弛缓症患者可接受气囊扩张(PD)或腹腔镜 Heller 肌切开术(LHM)治疗,两种方法的成功率相当。我们评估了在接受 PD 或 LHM 治疗的大量患者中,测压亚型是否与治疗反应相关(欧洲贲门失弛缓症试验)。

方法

从参加欧洲贲门失弛缓症试验的 176 名患者中收集食管预处理测压数据。使用 Eckardt 评分评估症状(体重减轻、吞咽困难、胸骨后疼痛和反流);如果 Eckardt 评分为 3 或更低,则认为治疗成功。测压图根据 3 种芝加哥亚型进行分类。

结果

44 名患者患有贲门失弛缓症 I 型(25%),114 名患者患有贲门失弛缓症 II 型(65%),18 名患者患有贲门失弛缓症 III 型(10%)。在至少 2 年的随访期后,II 型贲门失弛缓症患者的成功率明显高于 I 型(81%;P<.01,log-rank 检验)或 III 型(66%;P<.001,log-rank 检验)。对于 II 型贲门失弛缓症患者,PD 的成功率明显高于 LHM(100%比 93%;P<.05),但对于 III 型贲门失弛缓症患者,LHM 的成功率高于 PD(86%比 40%;P=12,差异因患者数量较少而无统计学意义)。对于 I 型贲门失弛缓症,LHM 和 PD 的成功率相似(81%比 85%;P=0.84)。

结论

根据测压图,II 型贲门失弛缓症(基于测压图)患者接受 PD 或 LHM 治疗的成功率高于 I 型和 III 型贲门失弛缓症患者。两种治疗组的 II 型成功率都很高,但 PD 组的成功率明显更高。III 型患者可能最好通过 LHM 治疗。试验注册号 NTR37;ISRCTN56304564。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验