Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Rationale for This Study The primary rationale for this study is to evaluate whether a shorter submucosal tunnel during POEM with an EGJ-focused myotomy in type II Achalasia cardia patients, provides equivalent or superior symptom relief compared to the conventional approach while minimizing adverse events such as GERD & blown out myotomy and decreasing the procedure time.
Objectives
Primary Objective:
To compare the incidence of GERD (with manual review) at 3 and 12 months' post-procedure between conventional POEM and two experimental short-tunnel POEM techniques in patients with Type II achalasia.
Secondary Objectives:
To evaluate
Achalasia type II is the most common manometric subtype and responds well to Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM). However, the optimal extent of submucosal tunneling and myotomy length for this population remains uncertain. Conventional POEM typically involves a 10-12 cm submucosal tunnel with a long esophageal myotomy (6-8 cm) and a 2-3 cm gastric extension. While effective, this approach may predispose patients to higher rates of post-procedure gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), mucosal injuries, and COâ‚‚-related insufflation events due to more extensive dissection.
Recent physiologic data from FLIP studies suggest that disrupting the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) complex alone-approximately 2 cm proximally and 2-3 cm distally-may be sufficient to normalize EGJ distensibility in achalasia. Additional proximal myotomy does not appear to improve compliance and may unnecessarily increase the risk of adverse events or compromise esophageal motor recovery. Emerging randomized studies have further shown that shorter esophageal myotomies (≤5 cm) can provide symptom relief comparable to standard approaches, with potentially lower reflux rates.
This trial evaluates whether limiting myotomy to the EGJ complex, with or without a shorter submucosal tunnel, can reduce post-POEM GERD while maintaining clinical efficacy in Type II achalasia. The study uses a three-arm randomized controlled design comparing:
Conventional POEM with long submucosal tunnel and long esophageal myotomy;
Standard-length tunnel with EGJ-only myotomy, preserving proximal esophageal muscle while maintaining full tunnel access;
Ultra-short tunnel POEM with EGJ-only myotomy, minimising dissection length and procedure time.
All procedures follow standardized POEM steps, including mucosal entry, submucosal tunneling, myotomy, and mucosal closure. Technical variations between arms are restricted to tunnel length and myotomy extent. Myotomy is performed primarily on the posterior axis, with selective circular myotomy proximally and full-thickness division across the LES as clinically appropriate. Adequacy of gastric extension is confirmed visually, and all mucosal incisions are closed using through-the-scope clips. Intraoperative quality control measures include frequent mucosal inspection, careful dissection along the muscularis propria, and standard management of bleeding or capnoperitoneum.
Participants are randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio using concealed allocation. Blinding of operators is not feasible, but outcome assessors, data collectors, and statisticians remain blinded to minimize detection and assessment bias. Post-procedure evaluation includes symptomatic scoring, endoscopy, manometry when applicable, and 24-hour pH impedance testing. GERD will be assessed both physiologically and via validated patient-reported measures. Adverse events will be systematically recorded using the AGREE classification.
An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board will conduct an interim analysis after 50% of participants complete 3-month follow-up, with pre-specified stopping rules for superiority, futility, or harm. The large sample size and three-arm design are intended to allow detection of clinically meaningful differences in GERD incidence while ensuring the trial remains adequately powered after accounting for anticipated non-compliance.
This study aims to provide high-quality, comparative data on whether submucosal tunnel length and targeted myotomy at the EGJ can optimize outcomes for Type II achalasia. If shorter techniques demonstrate equivalent clinical success with lower GERD rates and fewer adverse events, they may represent a safer and more efficient modification of the standard POEM procedure.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm A (Control Group) | Other | Conventional POEM with 10-12 cm submucosal tunnel, 6-8 cm Esophageal myotomy, and 2 cm gastric myotomy |
|
| Arm B (Standard Submucosal Tunnel + EGJ - complex only Myotomy) | Active Comparator | 10-12 cm submucosal tunnel with myotomy restricted to the EGJ (2 cm Esophageal and 2 cm gastric) |
|
| Arm C (Ultra-short Tunnel + EGJ- complex only Myotomy) | Active Comparator | 4 cm submucosal tunnel with myotomy focused on the EGJ (2 cm Esophageal and 2 cm gastric) |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arm A - Conventional POEM (Control Arm) | Procedure | Arm A - Conventional POEM (Control Arm)
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Incidence of Gastro esophageal Reflux disease (GERD) after poem | Comparison of gastroesophageal reflux disease incidence, assessed by manual review of esophageal acid exopsure and endoscopic findings, between conventional poem and two experimental short tunnel poem techinques in patients with type II achalasia | At 12 weeks and 52 weeks post-procedure |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Eckardt symptom score | Clinical success assessed using the Eckardt Symptom Score, a validated symptom scoring system for achalasia. Scale range: 0 to 12 Score < 3 indicates clinical success Higher scores indicate worse symptoms | At 12 weeks and 52 weeks post-procedure |
| Total procedure time |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dr.Aniruddha Pratap singh, MD, DM | Contact | 9004093248 | +91 | Doc.aniruddha85@gmail.com |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Dr.Mohan Kumar Ramchandani, MD, DM | AIG Hospitals | Study Director |
Not provided
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 34806659 | Result | Nabi Z, Talukdar R, Mandavdhare H, Reddy DN. Short versus long esophageal myotomy during peroral endoscopic myotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative trials. Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2022 Jul-Aug;28(4):261-267. doi: 10.4103/sjg.sjg_438_21. | |
| 22044977 | Result | Stefanidis D, Richardson W, Farrell TM, Kohn GP, Augenstein V, Fanelli RD; Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons. SAGES guidelines for the surgical treatment of esophageal achalasia. Surg Endosc. 2012 Feb;26(2):296-311. doi: 10.1007/s00464-011-2017-2. Epub 2011 Nov 2. No abstract available. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Arm B - Standard Tunnel with EGJ complex-only Myotomy | Procedure |
|
|
| Arm C - Ultra-short Tunnel POEM with EGJ complex -only Myotomy | Procedure |
|
|
Total duration of the POEM procedure measured from mucosal incision to mucosal closure, recorded in minutes. |
| Periprocedural (during the procedure) |
| use of acid suppressants | Requirement for acid suppressive medications, including proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or H2-receptor blockers, following the procedure. | Up to 1 year post-procedure |
| severity of esophagitis | Severity of esophagitis assessed by upper gastrointestinal endoscopy using the Los Angeles Classification of Esophagitis: Scale: Grade A = mild Grade B = moderate Grade C = severe Grade D = very severe (Higher grades indicate more severe esophagitis.) | At 12 weeks post procedure |
| intraoperative and post operative adverse events | Intraoperative and postoperative complications classified according to the AGREE Classification, graded from A to E, where higher grades indicate more severe adverse events.Grades A to E Higher grades indicates more adverse events | Periprocedural and post-procedure |
| Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease- Health Related Quality of Life questionnaire (GERD-HRQL) | Patient-reported gastroesophageal reflux disease-related quality of life assessed using the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease- Health Related Quality of Life questionnaire. Scale range: 0 to 18 Higher scores indicate worse Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-related quality of life | At 12 weeks and 52 weeks post-procedure |
| Clinically relevant Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire (GERD-Q) | Clinically relevant GERD assessed using the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire (GERD-Q). Scale range: 0 to 18 Higher scores indicate worse Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease symptoms Clinically relevant Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease defined as Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire (GERD-Q). score > 7 and/or presence of reflux esophagitis on endoscopy with abnormal esophageal acid exposure time (AET) | At 1 year post-procedure |
| duration of hospital stay | Length of hospital stay measured as the total number of inpatient days following the procedure. | up to 1 week |
| 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) | Health-related quality of life assessed using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Scores range from 0 to 100 for each domain Higher scores indicate better health-related quality of life | At baseline (pre-procedure), 12 weeks, and 52 weeks post-procedure |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D004935 | Esophageal Diseases |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D005767 | Gastrointestinal Diseases |
| D004066 | Digestive System Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided