Pneumatic dilatation or esophagomyotomy treatment for idiopathic achalasia: Clinical outcomes and cost analysis

Henry P. Parkman, James C. Reynolds, Ann Ouyang, Ernest F. Rosato, John M. Eisenberg, Sidney Cohen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

151 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The choice between pneumatic dilatation and surgical esophagomyotomy as the initial treatment for achalasia is controversial. The aims of this study were to determine the long term clinical outcome and costs of treating achalasia initially with pneumatic dilatation as compared to esophagomyotomy. Of 123 patients undergoing an initial pneumatic dilatation for achalasia at our institution from 1976 to 1986, 71 (58%) received no further treatment for achalasia during a mean follow up of 4.7±2.8 years. Only 15 of these 123 patients (12%) eventually underwent surgical esophagomyotomy, (two for perforation during pneumatic dilatation, 13 for persistent or recurrent symptoms). The degree of dysphagia at follow up was improved to a similar degree in patients treated with an initial pneumatic dilatation as compared to patients treated with an initial esophagomyotomy. Patients with age≥45, years at time of initial pneumatic dilatation had fewer subsequent treatments for persistent or recurrent symptoms and had less dysphagia on follow up as compared to patients <45 years. Subsequent pneumatic dilatations to treat persistent or recurrent symptoms were less beneficial than an initial pneumatic dilation. The cost of esophagomyotomy was 5 times greater than the cost of pneumatic dilatation. When costs were analyzed to include subsequent treatments of symptomatic patients, the total expectant costs of treating with an initial esophagomyotomy remained 2.4 times greater than treating with an initial pneumatic dilatation. This study suggests that an initial pneumatic dilatation will be the only treatment needed for the majority of patients with achalasia. A treatment regimen starting with penumatic dilatation has less overall costs than starting with esophagomyotomy. For each subsequent pneumatic dilatation, however, the clinical benefit leans toward, surgery.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)75-85
Number of pages11
JournalDigestive Diseases and Sciences
Volume38
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1993

Fingerprint

Esophageal Achalasia
Dilatation
Costs and Cost Analysis
Therapeutics
Deglutition Disorders

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Physiology
  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Parkman, Henry P. ; Reynolds, James C. ; Ouyang, Ann ; Rosato, Ernest F. ; Eisenberg, John M. ; Cohen, Sidney. / Pneumatic dilatation or esophagomyotomy treatment for idiopathic achalasia : Clinical outcomes and cost analysis. In: Digestive Diseases and Sciences. 1993 ; Vol. 38, No. 1. pp. 75-85.
@article{2cd318a93e264b1d83a4a71bd65329ed,
title = "Pneumatic dilatation or esophagomyotomy treatment for idiopathic achalasia: Clinical outcomes and cost analysis",
abstract = "The choice between pneumatic dilatation and surgical esophagomyotomy as the initial treatment for achalasia is controversial. The aims of this study were to determine the long term clinical outcome and costs of treating achalasia initially with pneumatic dilatation as compared to esophagomyotomy. Of 123 patients undergoing an initial pneumatic dilatation for achalasia at our institution from 1976 to 1986, 71 (58{\%}) received no further treatment for achalasia during a mean follow up of 4.7±2.8 years. Only 15 of these 123 patients (12{\%}) eventually underwent surgical esophagomyotomy, (two for perforation during pneumatic dilatation, 13 for persistent or recurrent symptoms). The degree of dysphagia at follow up was improved to a similar degree in patients treated with an initial pneumatic dilatation as compared to patients treated with an initial esophagomyotomy. Patients with age≥45, years at time of initial pneumatic dilatation had fewer subsequent treatments for persistent or recurrent symptoms and had less dysphagia on follow up as compared to patients <45 years. Subsequent pneumatic dilatations to treat persistent or recurrent symptoms were less beneficial than an initial pneumatic dilation. The cost of esophagomyotomy was 5 times greater than the cost of pneumatic dilatation. When costs were analyzed to include subsequent treatments of symptomatic patients, the total expectant costs of treating with an initial esophagomyotomy remained 2.4 times greater than treating with an initial pneumatic dilatation. This study suggests that an initial pneumatic dilatation will be the only treatment needed for the majority of patients with achalasia. A treatment regimen starting with penumatic dilatation has less overall costs than starting with esophagomyotomy. For each subsequent pneumatic dilatation, however, the clinical benefit leans toward, surgery.",
author = "Parkman, {Henry P.} and Reynolds, {James C.} and Ann Ouyang and Rosato, {Ernest F.} and Eisenberg, {John M.} and Sidney Cohen",
year = "1993",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/BF01296777",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "38",
pages = "75--85",
journal = "Digestive Diseases and Sciences",
issn = "0163-2116",
publisher = "Kluwer Academic Publishers-Plenum Publishers",
number = "1",

}

Pneumatic dilatation or esophagomyotomy treatment for idiopathic achalasia : Clinical outcomes and cost analysis. / Parkman, Henry P.; Reynolds, James C.; Ouyang, Ann; Rosato, Ernest F.; Eisenberg, John M.; Cohen, Sidney.

In: Digestive Diseases and Sciences, Vol. 38, No. 1, 01.01.1993, p. 75-85.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pneumatic dilatation or esophagomyotomy treatment for idiopathic achalasia

T2 - Clinical outcomes and cost analysis

AU - Parkman, Henry P.

AU - Reynolds, James C.

AU - Ouyang, Ann

AU - Rosato, Ernest F.

AU - Eisenberg, John M.

AU - Cohen, Sidney

PY - 1993/1/1

Y1 - 1993/1/1

N2 - The choice between pneumatic dilatation and surgical esophagomyotomy as the initial treatment for achalasia is controversial. The aims of this study were to determine the long term clinical outcome and costs of treating achalasia initially with pneumatic dilatation as compared to esophagomyotomy. Of 123 patients undergoing an initial pneumatic dilatation for achalasia at our institution from 1976 to 1986, 71 (58%) received no further treatment for achalasia during a mean follow up of 4.7±2.8 years. Only 15 of these 123 patients (12%) eventually underwent surgical esophagomyotomy, (two for perforation during pneumatic dilatation, 13 for persistent or recurrent symptoms). The degree of dysphagia at follow up was improved to a similar degree in patients treated with an initial pneumatic dilatation as compared to patients treated with an initial esophagomyotomy. Patients with age≥45, years at time of initial pneumatic dilatation had fewer subsequent treatments for persistent or recurrent symptoms and had less dysphagia on follow up as compared to patients <45 years. Subsequent pneumatic dilatations to treat persistent or recurrent symptoms were less beneficial than an initial pneumatic dilation. The cost of esophagomyotomy was 5 times greater than the cost of pneumatic dilatation. When costs were analyzed to include subsequent treatments of symptomatic patients, the total expectant costs of treating with an initial esophagomyotomy remained 2.4 times greater than treating with an initial pneumatic dilatation. This study suggests that an initial pneumatic dilatation will be the only treatment needed for the majority of patients with achalasia. A treatment regimen starting with penumatic dilatation has less overall costs than starting with esophagomyotomy. For each subsequent pneumatic dilatation, however, the clinical benefit leans toward, surgery.

AB - The choice between pneumatic dilatation and surgical esophagomyotomy as the initial treatment for achalasia is controversial. The aims of this study were to determine the long term clinical outcome and costs of treating achalasia initially with pneumatic dilatation as compared to esophagomyotomy. Of 123 patients undergoing an initial pneumatic dilatation for achalasia at our institution from 1976 to 1986, 71 (58%) received no further treatment for achalasia during a mean follow up of 4.7±2.8 years. Only 15 of these 123 patients (12%) eventually underwent surgical esophagomyotomy, (two for perforation during pneumatic dilatation, 13 for persistent or recurrent symptoms). The degree of dysphagia at follow up was improved to a similar degree in patients treated with an initial pneumatic dilatation as compared to patients treated with an initial esophagomyotomy. Patients with age≥45, years at time of initial pneumatic dilatation had fewer subsequent treatments for persistent or recurrent symptoms and had less dysphagia on follow up as compared to patients <45 years. Subsequent pneumatic dilatations to treat persistent or recurrent symptoms were less beneficial than an initial pneumatic dilation. The cost of esophagomyotomy was 5 times greater than the cost of pneumatic dilatation. When costs were analyzed to include subsequent treatments of symptomatic patients, the total expectant costs of treating with an initial esophagomyotomy remained 2.4 times greater than treating with an initial pneumatic dilatation. This study suggests that an initial pneumatic dilatation will be the only treatment needed for the majority of patients with achalasia. A treatment regimen starting with penumatic dilatation has less overall costs than starting with esophagomyotomy. For each subsequent pneumatic dilatation, however, the clinical benefit leans toward, surgery.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027509146&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027509146&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/BF01296777

DO - 10.1007/BF01296777

M3 - Article

C2 - 8420763

AN - SCOPUS:0027509146

VL - 38

SP - 75

EP - 85

JO - Digestive Diseases and Sciences

JF - Digestive Diseases and Sciences

SN - 0163-2116

IS - 1

ER -