13-year follow-up of a prospective comparison of the long-term clinical efficacy of temporary self-expanding metallic stents and pneumatic dilatation for the treatment of achalasia in 120 patients.

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to compare the efficacy of self-expanding metallic stents and pneumatic dilation for the long-term clinical treatment of achalasia. Patients diagnosed with achalasia (n = 120) were allocated for treatment with pneumatic dilation (n = 30; group A) or a temporary self-expanding metallic stent with a diameter of 20 mm (n = 30; group B), 25 mm (n = 30; group C), or 30 mm (n = 30; group D). Data on clinical symptoms, complications, and long-term clinical outcomes were collected, and follow-up was performed at 6 months and at 1, 3-5, 5-8, 8-10, and more than 10 years after surgery. Pneumatic dilation and stent placement were technically successful in all patients. The follow-up at more than 10 years revealed that the clinical remission rate in group D (83.3%) was higher than that in groups A (0%), B (0%), and C (28.6%), and the overall cumulative clinical failure rate in group D (13%) was lower than that in groups A (76.7%), B (53.3%), and C (26.7%). Patients in group D exhibited reduced dysphagia scores and lower esophageal sphincter pressures and had normal levels of barium height and width during the follow-up periods, whereas these markers increased with time in the other groups. The duration of primary patency in group D was also longer than that in groups A, B, and C. A temporary self-expanding metallic stent with a diameter of 30 mm has superior clinical efficacy for the treatment of achalasia compared with pneumatic dilation or self-expanding metallic stents with diameters of 20 or 25 mm.