Gastric per-oral endoscopic myotomy versus pyloromyotomy for gastroparesis: An international comparative study

Abstract

Background and Aim: Gastroparesis is a potentially debilitating gastric motility disorder with limited treatment options. Highest efficacy treatments include gastric per-oral endoscopic myotomy (GPOEM) and surgical pyloromyotomy. This study compares the efficacy and safety of GPOEM versus laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for refractory gastroparesis. Methods: Patients who underwent GPOEM or laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for refractory gastroparesis from four centers across the USA and Latin America were included in a dedicated registry. Data collected included patient demographics, imaging, laboratory values, clinical success, gastroparesis cardinal symptom index, procedure time, pre-op and post-op gastric emptying times, adverse events, and hospital length of stay. Results: A total of 102 patients were included (mean age 47; 32.4% male): GPOEM n = 39, surgical pyloromyotomy n = 63.Technical success was 100% in both groups. Clinical success was 92.3% in the GPOEM group and 82.5% in the surgery group (P = 0.164). The GPOEM group had a significantly higher post-op GSCI score reduction by 1.3 units (P < 0.00001), post-op retention reduction at 2 h by 18% (P < 0.00001), post-op retention reduction at 4 h by 25% (P < 0.00001) and a lower procedure time by 20 min (P < 0.00001) as compared with surgery. GPOEM also had a lower hospital length of stay by 2.8 days (P < 0.00001). Adverse events were significantly fewer in the GPOEM group (13%) compared with surgery group (33.3%; P = 0.021). Mean blood loss in the GPOEM group was only 3.6 mL compared with 866 mL in the surgery group. Conclusions: The GPOEM may be a less invasive, safer, and more efficacious procedural treatment for refractory gastroparesis as compared with surgical pyloromyotomy.