ERRATUM

Peroral endoscopic myotomy: an evolving treatment for achalasia

Robert Bechara, Haruo Ikeda and Haruhiro Inoue
Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. advance online publication 2 June 2015; doi:10.1038/nrgastro.2015.87
In the version of this article originally published online, incomplete data for the Charton et
al. and Sharata et al. studies were reported in Supplementary Table1. These errors have
now been corrected.

Supplementary Table 1 | POEM studies including >10 patients

Study

Country

N
Patie
nts

Mea
n/
med
ian
age
(ran
ge)

N
Previou
s
endosc
opic or
surgica
l
treatm
ent (%)

N
Sigmo
id
achal
asia
(%)

Mean/m
edian
LOP
minutes
(range)

Mean/m
edian
LOM cm
(range)

8.1 (3
15)

Mean/m
edian
follow-up
(months)

Effic
acy
(%
Ecka
rdt
scor
e
<3)

Mean/m
edian
Eckardt
score
prePOEM/p
ostPOEM

LESP
(mmHg
) prePOEM/
postPOEM

IRP
(mmHg
) prePOEM/
postPOEM

TBE
prePOEM/
postPOEM

Incomp
lete
proced
ures
(%)

GERD
on
followup Abso
lute
(%)

Insuffla
tion
AEs
Absolut
e (%)

Total AEs
/ requiring
intervention

(%/%)

91.7*

52.4/19
.8

1 (5.9)

1(33)

3/3
(17.7/17.7)

68.5 (23 9.5 (7

180)
13)

2.5

97.6*

()

/1(/2.4)

2 (18.1) 0

100.7
(75140)

100

7.1/1.1

45.1/16
.9

1 (9.1)

0(0)

2(50)

4/2 (36/18)

42
(10
77)

56
(47.1)

65.8 (21 9.2 (7

193)
13)

94

()

/26 (
/21.8)

18

59
(22
88)

6(33.3)

135 (90
260)

9 (712)

11.4

100

6/0

45/16.8 29/8.5

48/100# 0
(%
emptying
at 5 min)

7(50)

2(40)

5/5
(27.8.7/27.
8)

Von
Renteln
et al.
(2012)S6

Hamburg, 16
Germany

45
(26
76)

11
(68.8)

114 (65
188)

12 (817) 3

94

8.8/1.4

27.2/11
.8

/81 (% 0
rapid
emptying
)

1 (6)

()

-/9 (-/56.3)

Zhou et
al.

Shanghai, 205
China

43.9
(6

68.5 (10 9.5 (7

180)
13)

99*

()

Inoue et
al.
(2010)S1

Yokoham 17
a, Japan

41
(18
62)

3
(17.6)

5
(29.4)

126
(100
180)

Zhou et
al.
(2011)S2

Shanghai, 42
China

43.9
(10
70)

32
(24
58)

Costama Rome,
nga et al. Italy
(2012)S3
Ren et
al.
(2012)S4

11

Shanghai, 119
China

Swanstr Portland,
m et
USA
al.(2012)

10.2 ()

S5

8.5

3(1.5)

(2012)S7||

75)

Charton Dusseldo 21
et al.
rf,
(2013)S8|| Germany

(19
76)

12(57)

()

12 (522) 9

95

6.6/1.4

46/22

()

4/2 (19/9.5)

Ujiki et
al.
(2013)S9

64.1( 13(72)
)

155.8 ()

11.2 ()

3.86

94.4

6.4/0.7

3(16)

3(75)

4/4
(22.2/22.2)

117 (70
190)

10.8 (7
15)

5.9

100

5.5/0

43.6/29 28.7/16
.8
.6

3/15(20) 2 (66.7) 3/1(18.8/6.

25)

Evanston, 18
USA

Chiu et
Hong
al.
Kong,
(2013)S10 China

16

47
(22
87)

2 (12.5) 0

Freidel et Mineola,
al.
USA
(2013)S11

45

53
(23
93)

16(35)

12(27) ()

9 ()

95

7.8/0.4

6(40)

15/15
(33/33)

Hungnes Washingt
s et al.
on, USA
(2013)S12

18

38
(22
69)

9 (614)

89

7/1

19/9

21/12

14/0#
(height
in cm at
5 min)

7(39)

8 (57)

14/8(78/44)

45
(3
87)

41(13. 110 (50

7)
245)

14.1 ()

12

98.2

6.1/1.3

27.3/13
.4

15(4.9)

1 (11)

9/8(3/2.7)

6 (46)

1 (7.7) 103.5
(60180)

10.7 (8
15)

6.9

100

6.4/0.4

30.3/15 26/10.8
.3

3 (23.1)

0(0)

0/0

Inoue et Yokoham 300

al.
a, Japan
(2013)S13

113 (88
220)

||

Lee et al. Seoul,

(2013)S14 Korea

13

39.6
(13
56)

Sharata Portland,
et al.
USA
(2013)S15

40

54 () 12(30)

2(5)

131.9 ()

9.3 (4
20)

100

6/1

11/27
(40)

2 (40)

5/5
(12.5/12.5)

Teitelbau Chicago,
m et al. USA
(2013)S16

12

41
(22
60)

1(8)

()

()

100

7/1

9.4/1.2 0
(mean
height in
cm at
5 min

2 (17)

()

/ (/)

43()

3 (30)

()

()

100

8/1

20.5/6.
8

10.1/2.
3#

6(60)

0(0)

0/0

Verlaan
et al.

Amsterda 10
m,

(2013)S17 Netherlan
ds

(height
in cm at
5 min

Li et al.
Shanghai, 238
(2014)S18 China

39.8[ 99(41.6 18(7.6) 45.7()

]
)

10.2 ()

Von
Internatio 70
Renteln nal
et al.
(2013)S19

45[]

24
(34.3)

105 (54
240)

Zhai et al. Beijing,

(2013)S20 China

95.0

7.8/1.2

30.5/13
.5

41/220
(18.6)

51 (54)

95/59(39.9/
24.8)

13 (523) 12

82.4

6.9/1.7

27.6/8.
9

29(42)

()

10/10
(14.3/14.3)

40
[16-6
2]

67.1 ()

11.4 ()

96.2

7.5/0.6

4 (7.5)

9(69)

13/
(24.5/)

Cai et al. Shanghai, 100

(2014)S21 China

40.9
[18-7
2]

24(24)

8(8)

29.9 ()

10.8 (7
13)

11.5

96.5

7.4/1.1

10 (10)

7(47)

15/10
(15/10)

Chen et Nanjing,
al.
China
(2014)S22

45

46.3
[26-7
2]

10 (22)

73.8 ()

9.56 ()

24

100

6.3/0.9

24.9/11
.1

3 (6.7)

2(40)

5/3
(11.1/6.7)

Familiari Rome,
et al.
Italy
(2014)S23

100

48.4[ 24(24)
]

7(7)

83 (49
140)

12 (717) 11

94.5

8.1/1.1

41.4/19

39/73(5
3.4)

Ling et
Nanjing,
al.
China
(2014)S24

87

[]

42 ()

()

95.4

7.1/0.8

32.4/7.
2

9.1/2.7 0
(mean
height in
cm at
5 min)

5 (5.7)

11(85)

13/2(14.9/2
.3)

Stavropo Mineola,
ulos et
USA
al.
(2014)S25

100

52
[17-9
3]

42 (42)

20 (20) 106 (39

240)

12 (326) 13.3

97

7.8/0.2

44.2/17
.6

/>80% 0
emptying
at 5 min
(90%)

17.53
(33)

8 (24)

33/32
(33/32)

51

42.9
[]

21(41.2
)

9.9 ()

7.0/0.3

32.2/6.
9

9.6/2.8

4(40)

10/(19.6/
)

53

8.5

14.4

/33(/33)
40()

||

Ling et
Nanjing,
al.
China
(2014)S26

38.4 ()

13.9

10

78*

15(37.5) 1(17)

6/3 (15/7.5)

11(39.3 21.4
)
(6)

99.1 (61 14.4 (10 16

160)
18)

100

6.7/0.7

71.2/21

11 (39.3) 0(0)

2/0 (7/0)

26/68
(38.2)

11
(69)

16/14
(16/14)

13/22(
59%)

15
(47)

32/18
(78/45)

7 (15%)

Orenstei Cleveland 40
n et al.
, USA
(2014)S27

60.5
(20-9
0)

16(40)

Minami
Nagasaki, 28
et al.
Japan
(2014)S28

52.2
[19-4
8]

Sharata
et al.
(2014)S

111.6 ()

13 (11
16)

Portland
, USA

100

58
[1883]

35

5(5)

128
(45
215)

8 (423)

16

98

6/1

44.3/2
2.2

Chicago,
USA

41

45
[]

4 (10)

110 ()

9 ()

15

92

7/1

22/9

28/11

Guangzh
ou,
China

46

36
[]

8(17.4
)

7(15)

52 (30
120)

5.4
(3.5
7.5)

100

8.4/2.7

39.4/2
4.4

38.6/2
5.7

40/90
(%
emptyin
g at 1
min)
16/5#
(height
in cm
at 5
min)
5.4/2.
6

Shangh
ai,
China

32

43.6
[1872]

23
(71.9)

32(10
0)

63.7
(22
130)

10.3 (7
14)

30

37.9/1
2.9

29

Teitelba
um et
al.
(2014)S
30

Wang et
al.
(2014)S

56/- (/)
(0)

31

Hu et
al.
(2014)S

96.8

7.8/1.4

6(18.8)

5 (29)

17/15
(53.1/46.9
)

32

Chen et Shangh
27
13.8 7
0(0)
39.4
9.6 ()
24.6
96.3 8.3/0.7
31.6/1 23.8/9
1
3(11.1)
3
8/6
al.
ai,
[6-1
(25.9)
(2190)
2.9
.9
(37.5)
(30.8/23.1
(2014)S China
7]
)
33
**
If data clearly used in later series, then the earlier series were omitted. Asymptomatic radiological findings were not included. Insufflation related AEs are also expressed as a percentage
of the total number of reported AEs. data not available. *Non-Eckardt symptom score used to define treatment success. Not reported if patients had multiple treatments, the reported
number is assuming only one treatment per patient. Evidence of GERD by 24 pH, endoscopy or validated GERD questionnaire. ||Abstract. Air Insufflation used for a proportion of the
cases. #Median used. **Paediatric series. Pneumoperitoneum requiring decompression, subcutaneous emphysema and mucosal flap injuries were also included in total AEs.
Abbreviations: AEs, adverse events; IRP, integrated relaxation pressure; LESP, lower oesophageal sphincter pressure; LOP, Length of procedure; LOM, length of myotomy; TBE, timed
barium oesophagram.

S1. Inoue, H. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia. Endoscopy 42, 265271 (2010).
S2. Zhou, P. H. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for esophageal achalasia: report of 42 cases [Chinese]. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi 14, 705708 (2011).
S3. Costamagna, G. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for oesophageal achalasia: Preliminary results in humans. Dig. Liver Dis. 44, 827832 (2012).
S4. Ren, Z. et al. Perioperative management and treatment for complications during and after peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia (EA) (data from 119

cases). Surg. Endosc. 26, 32673272 (2012).

S5. Swanstrom, L. L. et al. Long-term outcomes of an endoscopic myotomy for achalasia: the POEM procedure. Ann. Surg. 256, 659667 (2012).
S6. von Renteln, D. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: a prospective single center study. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 107, 4117 (2012).
S7. Zhou, P.-H. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia: 205 cases report [abstract 282]. Gastrointest. Endosc. 75, AB132AB133 (2012).
S8. Charton, J. P., Schumacher, B., Toermer, T. & Neuhaus, H. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia: pilot case series of a western referral center [abstract Su1510].
Gastrointest. Endosc. 77, AB351 (2013).
S9. Ujiki, M. B. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy: a short-term comparison with the standard laparoscopic approach. Surgery 154, 893897 (2013).
S10.
Chiu, P. W. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for treatment of achalasia: from bench to bedside (with video). Gastrointest. Endosc. 77, 2938 (2013).
S11.
Friedel, D., Modayil, R., Iqbal, S., Grendell, J. H. & Stavropoulos, S. N. Per-oral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia: an American perspective. World J. Gastrointest.Endosc.
5, 420427 (2013).
S12.
Hungness, E. S. et al. Comparison of perioperative outcomes between peroral esophageal myotomy (POEM) and laparoscopic Heller myotomy. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 17,
22835 (2013).
S13.
Inoue, H. et al. Clinical results in 300 cases of POEM for esophageal achalasia: a single institute registered prospective study [abstract 54]. Gastrointest. Endosc. 77,
AB121AB122 (2013).
S14.
Lee, B. H. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for treatment of achalasia: initial results of a korean study. Clin. Endosc. 46, 161167 (2013).
S15.
Sharata, A. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is safe and effective in the setting of prior endoscopic intervention. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 17, 11881192 (2013).
S16.
Teitelbaum, E. N. et al. Peroral esophageal myotomy (POEM) and laparoscopic Heller myotomy produce a similar short-term anatomic and functional effect. Surgery 154,
88591 (2013).
S17.
Verlaan, T. et al. Effect of peroral endoscopic myotomy on esophagogastric junction physiology in patients with achalasia. Gastrointest. Endosc. 78, 3944 (2013).
S18.
Li, Q. L. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: a clinical comparative study of endoscopic full-thickness and circular muscle myotomy. J. Am.
Coll. Surg. 217, 442451 (2013).
S19.
Von Renteln, D. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: an international prospective multicenter study. Gastroenterology 145, 30911 (2013).
S20.
Zhai, Y. et al. Comparison of peroral endoscopic myotomy with transverse entry incision versus longitudinal entry incision for achalasia [Chinese]. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue
Xue Bao 33, 13991402 (2013).
S21.
Cai, M. Y. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for idiopathic achalasia: randomized comparison of water-jet assisted versus conventional dissection technique. Surg.
Endosc. 28, 11581165 (2014).
S22.
Chen, X. et al. Two-year follow-up for 45 patients with achalasia who underwent peroral endoscopic myotomy. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 47, 890896 (2014).
S23.
Familiari, P. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for esophageal achalasia: outcomes of the first 100 patients with short-term follow-up. Ann. Surg.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000992.
S24.
Ling, T. S. et al. Effectiveness of peroral endoscopic myotomy in the treatment of achalasia: a pilot trial in Chinese Han population with a minimum of one-year follow-up.
J. Dig. Dis. 15, 352358 (2014).
S25.
Stavropoulos, S. N. et al. Per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia: large single-center 4-year series by a gastroenterologist with emphasis on objective
assessment of emptying, GERD, LES Distensibility and post-procedural pain [abstract Mo1530]. Gastrointest. Endosc. 79, AB472AB473 (2014).
S26.
Ling, T., Guo, H. & Zou, X. Effect of peroral endoscopic myotomy in achalasia patients with failure of prior pneumatic dilation: a prospective case-control study. J.
Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 29, 16091613 (2014).
S27.
Orenstein, S. B. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) leads to similar results in patients with and without prior endoscopic or surgical therapy. Surg. Endosc. 29,
10641070 (2014).
S28.
Minami, H. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for esophageal achalasia: clinical impact of 28 cases. Dig. Endosc. 26, 4351 (2014).
S29.
Sharata, A. M. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal primary motility disorders: analysis of 100 consecutive patients. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 19, 161
170 (2015).
S30.
Teitelbaum, E. N. et al. Symptomatic and physiologic outcomes one year after peroral esophageal myotomy (POEM) for treatment of achalasia. Surg. Endosc. 28, 3359

3365 (2014).
S31.
Wang, J. et al. Safety and efficacy of the modified peroral endoscopic myotomy with shorter myotomy for achalasia patients: a prospective study. Dis. Esophagus.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dote.12280.
S32.
Hu, J. W. et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for advanced achalasia with sigmoid-shaped esophagus: long-term outcomes from a prospective, single-center study. Surg.
Endosc. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-4013-9.
S33.
Chen, W.-F. et al. Long-term outcomes of peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia in pediatric patients: a prospective, single-center study. Gastrointest. Endosc. 81, 91
100 (2015).