Abdominal versus thoracic approach for myotomy in esophageal achalasia.

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: de Almeida, J C
Publication Date: 1992
Other Authors: de Almeida, J M
Format: Article
Language: por
Source: Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
Download full: https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/4512
Summary: Miotomy is the most common operation for the treatment of achalasia of the esophagus. The most important complication of this operation is gastro-esophageal reflux, and controversy exists in the choice of a thoracic or abdominal approach to this operation. From 1974 until 1988, our group performed 45 miotomies for achalasia of the esophagus. Follow-up was obtained in 82% of the patients. The thoracic approach was used in 21 cases (tor), and 24 patients were operated through an abdominal approach (abd). All the miotomies had an anti-reflux procedure associated. Post-operative evaluation consisted of: clinical score determination; endoscopy with biopsy; manometry; 24 Phmetry. The clinical score revealed that 47% of the patients in the group tor were asymptomatic, and in the group abd this rate was 53%. Absence of macroscopic esophagitis was registered in 75% of the patients in the group tor, and in 91% in the group abd. Microscopic esophagitis was observed in 42% of the cases in the group tor, and in 45% of the group abd. Manometry revealed a low pressure in the inferior esophageal sphincter in 90% of the cases of the group tor, and in 80% of the group abd. Pathological gastro-esophageal reflux, detected by 24 h Phmetry, was present in 29% of the group tor, and in 36% of the group abd. The results in these two groups were very similar, uniformly favourable, and without evidence of superiority of either operation. The choice of a thoracic, or abdominal approach should depend on associated factors such as patient age, respiratory disease, etc.
id RCAP_0168c0e2247ffde02ba04d4c2102d358
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/4512
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository_id_str https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160
spelling Abdominal versus thoracic approach for myotomy in esophageal achalasia.Via abdominal versus torácica para a miotomia por acalásia do esófago.Miotomy is the most common operation for the treatment of achalasia of the esophagus. The most important complication of this operation is gastro-esophageal reflux, and controversy exists in the choice of a thoracic or abdominal approach to this operation. From 1974 until 1988, our group performed 45 miotomies for achalasia of the esophagus. Follow-up was obtained in 82% of the patients. The thoracic approach was used in 21 cases (tor), and 24 patients were operated through an abdominal approach (abd). All the miotomies had an anti-reflux procedure associated. Post-operative evaluation consisted of: clinical score determination; endoscopy with biopsy; manometry; 24 Phmetry. The clinical score revealed that 47% of the patients in the group tor were asymptomatic, and in the group abd this rate was 53%. Absence of macroscopic esophagitis was registered in 75% of the patients in the group tor, and in 91% in the group abd. Microscopic esophagitis was observed in 42% of the cases in the group tor, and in 45% of the group abd. Manometry revealed a low pressure in the inferior esophageal sphincter in 90% of the cases of the group tor, and in 80% of the group abd. Pathological gastro-esophageal reflux, detected by 24 h Phmetry, was present in 29% of the group tor, and in 36% of the group abd. The results in these two groups were very similar, uniformly favourable, and without evidence of superiority of either operation. The choice of a thoracic, or abdominal approach should depend on associated factors such as patient age, respiratory disease, etc.Miotomy is the most common operation for the treatment of achalasia of the esophagus. The most important complication of this operation is gastro-esophageal reflux, and controversy exists in the choice of a thoracic or abdominal approach to this operation. From 1974 until 1988, our group performed 45 miotomies for achalasia of the esophagus. Follow-up was obtained in 82% of the patients. The thoracic approach was used in 21 cases (tor), and 24 patients were operated through an abdominal approach (abd). All the miotomies had an anti-reflux procedure associated. Post-operative evaluation consisted of: clinical score determination; endoscopy with biopsy; manometry; 24 Phmetry. The clinical score revealed that 47% of the patients in the group tor were asymptomatic, and in the group abd this rate was 53%. Absence of macroscopic esophagitis was registered in 75% of the patients in the group tor, and in 91% in the group abd. Microscopic esophagitis was observed in 42% of the cases in the group tor, and in 45% of the group abd. Manometry revealed a low pressure in the inferior esophageal sphincter in 90% of the cases of the group tor, and in 80% of the group abd. Pathological gastro-esophageal reflux, detected by 24 h Phmetry, was present in 29% of the group tor, and in 36% of the group abd. The results in these two groups were very similar, uniformly favourable, and without evidence of superiority of either operation. The choice of a thoracic, or abdominal approach should depend on associated factors such as patient age, respiratory disease, etc.Ordem dos Médicos1992-09-30info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/4512oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/4512Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 5 No. 9 (1992): Setembro; 467-71Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 5 N.º 9 (1992): Setembro; 467-711646-07580870-399Xreponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAPporhttps://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/4512https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/4512/3533de Almeida, J Cde Almeida, J Minfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-12-20T11:03:44Zoai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/4512Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-28T10:39:48.818516Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Abdominal versus thoracic approach for myotomy in esophageal achalasia.
Via abdominal versus torácica para a miotomia por acalásia do esófago.
title Abdominal versus thoracic approach for myotomy in esophageal achalasia.
spellingShingle Abdominal versus thoracic approach for myotomy in esophageal achalasia.
de Almeida, J C
title_short Abdominal versus thoracic approach for myotomy in esophageal achalasia.
title_full Abdominal versus thoracic approach for myotomy in esophageal achalasia.
title_fullStr Abdominal versus thoracic approach for myotomy in esophageal achalasia.
title_full_unstemmed Abdominal versus thoracic approach for myotomy in esophageal achalasia.
title_sort Abdominal versus thoracic approach for myotomy in esophageal achalasia.
author de Almeida, J C
author_facet de Almeida, J C
de Almeida, J M
author_role author
author2 de Almeida, J M
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv de Almeida, J C
de Almeida, J M
description Miotomy is the most common operation for the treatment of achalasia of the esophagus. The most important complication of this operation is gastro-esophageal reflux, and controversy exists in the choice of a thoracic or abdominal approach to this operation. From 1974 until 1988, our group performed 45 miotomies for achalasia of the esophagus. Follow-up was obtained in 82% of the patients. The thoracic approach was used in 21 cases (tor), and 24 patients were operated through an abdominal approach (abd). All the miotomies had an anti-reflux procedure associated. Post-operative evaluation consisted of: clinical score determination; endoscopy with biopsy; manometry; 24 Phmetry. The clinical score revealed that 47% of the patients in the group tor were asymptomatic, and in the group abd this rate was 53%. Absence of macroscopic esophagitis was registered in 75% of the patients in the group tor, and in 91% in the group abd. Microscopic esophagitis was observed in 42% of the cases in the group tor, and in 45% of the group abd. Manometry revealed a low pressure in the inferior esophageal sphincter in 90% of the cases of the group tor, and in 80% of the group abd. Pathological gastro-esophageal reflux, detected by 24 h Phmetry, was present in 29% of the group tor, and in 36% of the group abd. The results in these two groups were very similar, uniformly favourable, and without evidence of superiority of either operation. The choice of a thoracic, or abdominal approach should depend on associated factors such as patient age, respiratory disease, etc.
publishDate 1992
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 1992-09-30
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/4512
oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/4512
url https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/4512
identifier_str_mv oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/4512
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/4512
https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/4512/3533
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Ordem dos Médicos
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Ordem dos Médicos
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 5 No. 9 (1992): Setembro; 467-71
Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 5 N.º 9 (1992): Setembro; 467-71
1646-0758
0870-399X
reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
collection Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv info@rcaap.pt
_version_ 1833591104072581120