↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Peroral endoscopic myotomy: procedural complications and pain management for the perioperative clinician

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Peroral endoscopic myotomy: procedural complications and pain management for the perioperative clinician
Published in
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, February 2017
DOI 10.2147/mder.s115632
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lopa Misra, Norio Fukami, Katarina Nikolic, Terrence L Trentman

Abstract

Achalasia refers to the lack of smooth muscle relaxation of the distal esophagus. Although nonsurgical treatments such as pneumatic dilatation of the distal esophagus and botulinum toxin injections have been performed, these procedures have limited duration. Similarly, surgical treatment with Heller myotomy is associated with complications. At our institution, we perform the peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in qualified patients. Briefly, POEM involves endoscopic creation of a mid-esophageal submucosal bleb, creation of a submucosal tunnel with the endoscope, and then a distal myotomy, resulting in relaxation of the distal esophagus. The aim of our study is to document perioperative pain and associated pain management for our initial patients undergoing POEM and to review the literature for perioperative complications of this procedure. Therefore, anesthetic and pain management for our initial eleven patients undergoing POEM were reviewed. Patient demographics, pre-POEM pain medication history, perioperative pain medication requirements, and post-POEM pain scores were examined. We found post-POEM pain was usually in the mild-moderate range; a combination of medications was effective (opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen). Our literature search revealed a wide frequency range of complications such as pneumoperitoneum and subcutaneous emphysema, with rare serious events such as capnopericardium leading to cardiac arrest. In conclusion, our experience with POEM suggests pain and can be managed adequately with a combination of medications; the procedure appears to be safe and reasonable to perform in an outpatient endoscopy unit.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 4 13%
Other 3 9%
Other 8 25%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 63%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Psychology 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Unknown 7 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 February 2017.
All research outputs
#22,834,739
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#287
of 314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#366,295
of 425,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 425,452 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.