Risk scoring system for the preprocedural prediction of the clinical failure of peroral endoscopic myotomy: a multicenter case–control study

Abstract

Background Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is effective for the management of achalasia and its variants; however, it can be ineffective in some patients. We aimed to develop and validate a risk scoring system to predict the clinical failure of POEM preoperatively.

Methods Consecutive patients who underwent POEM in 14 high volume centers between 2010 and 2020 were enrolled in this study. Clinical failure was defined as an Eckardt score of ≥ 4 or retreatment. A risk scoring system to predict the short-term clinical failure of POEM was developed using multivariable logistic regression and internally validated using bootstrapping and decision curve analysis.

Results Of the 2740 study patients, 112 (4.1 %) experienced clinical failure 6 months after POEM. Risk scores were assigned for three preoperative factors as follows: preoperative Eckardt score (1 point), manometric diagnosis (−4 points for type II achalasia), and a history of prior treatments (1 point for pneumatic dilation or 12 points for surgical/endoscopic myotomy). The discriminative capacity (concordance statistics 0.68, 95 %CI 0.62–0.72) and calibration (slope 1.15, 95 %CI 0.87–1.40) were shown. Decision curve analysis demonstrated its clinical usefulness. Patients were categorized into low (0–8 points; estimated risk of clinical failure < 5 %) and high risk (9–22 points; ≥ 5 %) groups. The proportions of clinical failure for the categories were stratified according to the mid-term outcomes (log-rank test, P < 0.001).

Conclusions This risk scoring system can predict the clinical failure of POEM preoperatively and provide useful information when making treatment decisions.

Publication History

Received: 13 February 2022

Accepted after revision: 15 June 2022

Accepted Manuscript online:
15 June 2022

Article published online:
24 August 2022

• References

• 1 Vaezi MF, Pandolfino JE, Yadlapati RH. et al. ACG clinical guidelines: diagnosis and management of achalasia. Am J Gastroenterol 2020; 115: 1393-1411
• 2 Inoue H, Minami H, Kobayashi Y. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia. Endoscopy 2010; 42: 265-271
• 3 Mundre P, Black CJ, Mohammed N. et al. Efficacy of surgical or endoscopic treatment of idiopathic achalasia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 6: 30-38
• 4 Shiwaku H, Inoue H, Sato H. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia: a prospective multicenter study in Japan. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91: 1037-1044.e2
• 5 Liu XY, Cheng J, Chen WF. et al. A risk-scoring system to predict clinical failure for patients with achalasia after peroral endoscopic myotomy. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91: 33-40.e1
• 6 Urakami S, Abe H, Tanaka S. et al. Development of a preoperative risk-scoring system for predicting poor responders to peroral endoscopic myotomy. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 93: 398-405
• 7 Eckardt VF, Aignherr C, Bernhard G. Predictors of outcome in patients with achalasia treated by pneumatic dilation. Gastroenterology 1992; 103: 1732-1738
• 8 Moons KG, Altman DG, Reitsma JB. et al. Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): Explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2015; 162: W1-W73
• 9 Japan Esophageal Society. Descriptive rules for achalasia of the esophagus, June 2012: 4th edition. Esophagus 2017; 14: 275-289
• 10 Kahrilas PJ, Bredenoord AJ, Fox M. et al. The Chicago classification of esophageal motility disorders, v3.0. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2015; 27: 160-174
• 11 Song BG, Min YW, Lee H. et al. Clinicomanometric factors associated with clinically relevant esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction from the sandhill high-resolution manometry system. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2018; 30: e13221
• 12 Kuribayashi S, Iwakiri K, Kawada A. et al. Variant parameter values-as defined by the Chicago criteria-produced by ManoScan and a new system with Unisensor catheter. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2015; 27: 188-194
• 13 Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant RX. Applied logistic regression. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2013
• 14 Sullivan LM, Massaro JM, d’Agostino RB. Presentation of multivariate data for clinical use: the Framingham Study risk score function. Stat Med 2014; 23: 1631-1660
• 15 Vickers AJ, Elkin EB. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Making 2006; 26: 565-574
• 16 Ren Y, Tang X, Chen Y. et al. Pre-treatment Eckardt score is a simple factor for predicting one-year peroral endoscopic myotomy failure in patients with achalasia. Surg Endosc 2017; 31: 3234-3241
• 17 Liu ZQ, Li QL, Chen WF. et al. The effect of prior treatment on clinical outcomes in patients with achalasia undergoing peroral endoscopic myotomy. Endoscopy 2019; 51: 307-316
• 18 Ngamruengphong S, Inoue H, Ujiki MB. et al. Efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy for treatment of achalasia after failed heller myotomy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 15: 1531-1537.e3
• 19 Rohof WO, Salvador R, Annese V. et al. Outcomes of treatment for achalasia depend on manometric subtype. Gastroenterology 2013; 144: 718-25 quiz e13
• 20 Hong SJ, Bhargava V, Jiang Y. et al. A unique esophageal motor pattern that involves longitudinal muscles is responsible for emptying in achalasia esophagus. Gastroenterology 2010; 139: 102-111
• 21 Pandolfino JE, Kwiatek MA, Nealis T. et al. Achalasia: a new clinically relevant classification by high-resolution manometry. Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 1526-1533
• 22 Patti MG, Pellegrini CA, Arcerito M. et al. Comparison of medical and minimally invasive surgical therapy for primary esophageal motility disorders. Arch Surg 1995; 130: 609-15 discussion 615
• 23 Werner YB, Hakanson B, Martinek J. et al. Endoscopic or surgical myotomy in patients with idiopathic achalasia. NEJM 2019; 381: 2219-2229