Alexander J Eckardt, Central Interdisciplinary Endoscopy Unit, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Charité University Hospitals Berlin, Campus Virchow, D-13353 Berlin, Germany

Volker F Eckardt, Department of Gastroenterology, Deutsche Klinik für Diagnostik, D-65191 Wiesbaden, Germany

Author contributions: Both authors drafted and revised the paper critically for important intellectual content and contributed equally to the preparation of the manuscript; Both authors give their final approval for publication.

Correspondence to: Dr. Volker F Eckardt, Professor, Deutsche Klinik für Diagnostik, Aukammallee 33, D-65191 Wiesbaden, Germany. eckardt.gastro@dkd-wiesbaden.de

Telephone: +49-611-577289  Fax: +49-611-577401

Received: April 28, 2009       Revised: July 8, 2009

Accepted: July 15, 2009

Published online: August 28, 2009

Abstract

Idiopathic achalasia is a rare primary motility disorder of the esophagus. The classical features are incomplete relaxation of a frequently hypertensive lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and a lack of peristalsis in the tubular esophagus. These motor abnormalities lead to dysphagia, stasis, regurgitation, weight loss, or secondary respiratory complications. Although major strides have been made in understanding the pathogenesis of this rare disorder, including a probable autoimmune mediated destruction of inhibitory neurons in response to an unknown insult in genetically susceptible individuals, a definite trigger has not been identified. The diagnosis of achalasia is suggested by clinical features and confirmed by further diagnostic tests, such as esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), manometry or barium swallow. These studies are not only used to exclude pseudoachalasia, but also might help to categorize the disease by severity or clinical subtype. Recent advances in diagnostic methods, including high resolution manometry (HRM), might allow prediction of treatment responses. The primary treatments for achieving long-term symptom relief are surgery and endoscopic methods. Although limited high-quality data exist, it appears that laparoscopic Heller myotomy with partial fundoplication is superior to endoscopic methods in achieving long-term relief of symptoms in the majority of patients. However, the current clinical approach to achalasia will depend not only on patients’ characteristics and clinical subtypes of the disease, but also on local expertise and patient preferences.

© 2009 The WJG Press and Baishideng. All rights reserved.

Key words: Achalasia; Esophageal motility disorder; Dysphagia; Esophagus; Lower esophageal sphincter; Pneumatic dilation; Botulinum toxin; Heller myotomy

Peer reviewer: Ian D Wallace, MD, Shakespeare Specialist Group, 181 Shakespeare Rd, Milford, Auckland 1309,
New Zealand

Eckardt AJ, Eckardt VF. Current clinical approach to achalasia. World J Gastroenterol 2009; 15(32): 3969-3975  Available from: URL: http://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/15/3969.asp  DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.15.3969

INTRODUCTION

Idiopathic achalasia is a rare primary motility disorder of the esophagus. The classical features are incomplete relaxation of a frequently hypertensive lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and a lack of peristalsis in the tubular esophagus. Although major strides have been made in understanding the pathogenesis of this rare disorder, including a probable autoimmune mediated destruction of inhibitory neurons in response to an unknown insult in genetically susceptible individuals, a definite trigger has not been identified. The motor abnormalities of achalasia are responsible for a number of clinical symptoms with variable response to current treatment options. Current therapies should be based on the results of clinical findings and further diagnostic tests, such as imaging studies, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), manometry, and possibly high resolution manometry (HRM). This editorial will review the clinical presentation, the latest diagnostic tools and the treatment options for this rare disorder and an individualized therapeutic approach, based on the current evidence, will be suggested.

CLINICAL PRESENTATION

The hallmark of achalasia (Greek: failure to relax) is dysphagia for solids and liquids in up to 100% and 97% of patients, respectively^[1-3]. As a result of stasis and retention of food and liquids in the esophagus, patients frequently experience weight loss (30%-91%), chest pain (17%-95%), regurgitation (59%-64%), and nocturnal cough (11%-46%)^[1]. Difficulty with belching might result from alteration of the upper esophageal belch reflex^[4]. Patients might frequently complain of heartburn. Although heartburn is the cardinal symptom of gastroesophageal reflux, which is the antithesis of achalasia, it occurred with a frequency of 72% in one study, even after the onset of dysphagia^[5]. The sensation of heartburn in patients with achalasia might be explained by retention of acidic or noxious food contents or by lactate production from bacterial fermentation within the esophagus^[6]. Hiccups can also occur, and probably result from esophageal distention and stimulation of afferent vagal fibers^[7]. The distribution of symptoms can differ in the population studied. Chest pain occurs predominantly in younger patients (mean age 40 years) and appears to improve over time^[8]. However, neither manometric, nor radiographic findings predict the occurrence of retrosternal pain. Most symptoms do not appear to have a specific gender distribution, although in Iranian patients, chest pain appeared to be more common among females^[9]. Physicians need to be aware of the spectrum of symptoms of achalasia, because diagnostic delays for years after the onset of symptoms appear to be due to misinterpretation of typical findings, rather than atypical presentations^[10].

The most common extraesophageal manifestations of achalasia are pulmonary complications. Structural or functional pulmonary abnormalities occur in more than half of patients and might be due to recurrent aspiration or tracheal compression from a dilated esophagus^[11]. In cases of extreme dilation and distortion of the cervical esophagus, a “bull frog neck” appearance can develop, leading to tracheal obstruction above the larynx and associated stridor^[2]. Although some investigators have observed delayed gastric emptying or gallbladder dysfunction in patients with achalasia^[12-14], others were unable to confirm these observations^[15], and it still remains elusive whether a selective defect of vagal ganglionic neurons might affect other parts of the gastrointestinal tract as well.

DIAGNOSIS AND CLINICAL VARIANTS

A number of tests are available to confirm the diagnosis of achalasia, once the clinical suspicion arises. Radiographic studies, EGD and esophageal manometry are the primary tools of investigation. Although EGD appears normal in 44% of patients with achalasia^[1], it might show esophageal dilatation and retention of food or secretions. During inversion of the endoscope in the stomach, tight adherence of the distal esophagus with downward motion of the gastroesophageal junction upon endoscope advancement can sometimes be visualized. However, despite the commonly elevated LES pressure, the esophagogastric junction can usually be traversed easily, and firm resistance should raise the suspicion of neoplastic infiltration or other causes of pseudoachalasia. Pseudoachalasia can mimic all endoscopic, radiographic and manometric findings of achalasia and has a broad differential diagnosis of neoplastic and non-neoplastic causes, which have been recently reviewed^[16,17]. Infiltration of the esophageal myenteric plexus by neoplastic cells or paraneoplastic processes have been suggested in patients with a malignant etiology^[16]. A shorter duration of symptoms and older age at presentation should raise a suspicion of pseudoachalasia, which often requires further testing with endoscopic ultrasound or CT scan to rule out malignancy^[17]. In our view, a simple and non-invasive initial test to differentiate between primary and secondary achalasia is transabdominal ultrasonography, which often allows a clear visualization of the gastric cardia and its surrounding structures^[18]. However, a negative ultrasound does not always exclude pseudoachalasia, and CT or other cross-sectional imaging should be added if clinical suspicion remains strong.

A barium esophagogram (barium swallow) is the most commonly used initial diagnostic study. It classically shows a typical smooth tapering of the distal esophagus (“bird’s beak”) with proximal dilation of the esophagus and lack of peristalsis during fluoroscopy. The value of obtaining a timed barium esophagogram in patients with achalasia lies in its potential to monitor the success of therapeutic interventions and to detect disease recurrence prior to the development of symptoms^[19]. The timed barium swallow is performed by having the patient drink 100-250 mL of barium in an upright position and by taking radiographs one, two and five minutes after the last swallow. The distance from the distal oesophagus to the top of the barium column, as well as the maximal esophageal width, are measured for comparison before and after treatment.

Manometry remains the diagnostic modality with the highest sensitivity and should be part of the diagnostic evaluation in all patients with achalasia. Three cardinal features support the diagnosis of classic achalasia: Aperistalsis of the smooth muscle portion of the esophagus, incomplete LES relaxation and elevated LES resting pressure. As mentioned above, manometric variants of achalasia have been described (Table 1). Vigorous achalasia is a variant characterized by aperistaltic, simultaneous esophageal contractions with higher average amplitudes (> 37 mmHg)^[20]. It has been suggested that vigorous achalasia might present an earlier form of achalasia, in which esophageal contractions against the outflow obstruction at the LES are still maintained. However, vigorous achalasia appears to be independent of age of onset and symptom duration, and is not associated with return to normal peristalsis after surgical myotomy^[21,22]. Although it has been suggested that patients with vigorous achalasia might show better success with botulinum toxin injection than patients with classic achalasia^[23], this has minor clinical relevance, because other treatment options are superior in most cases. Therefore, it remains unclear whether dividing patients into those with “vigorous achalasia” and “classic achalasia” has any clinical implications. Despite such reservations, physicians need to be aware that achalasia might present with a spectrum of manometric findings that might not meet all of the criteria specified above (Table 1)^[24]. Their significance lies in the recognition that these sometimes confusing manometric findings are consistent with achalasia when combined with additional clinical data supportive of the diagnosis. As mentioned for the timed barium swallow, manometry also plays a role in monitoring treatment response and predicting treatment success of pneumatic dilatation, as discussed below.

The recent introduction of HRM with pressure topography plotting into the diagnostic armory has brought a renaissance to the classification of idiopathic achalasia into variants with possible clinical implications. A retrospective study by Pandolfino et al^[25] described three distinct variants, with type Ⅰ exhibiting minimal esophageal contractility without pressurization, type Ⅱ with absent peristalsis but compartmentalized, pan-esophageal pressurization, and type Ⅲ with lumen obliterating spasm. The authors showed that pan-esophageal pressurization (type Ⅱ) had the best overall treatment response, whereas type Ⅲ predicted a poor treatment response to all types of therapy. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these interesting early results.

TREATMENT

Treatment of idiopathic achalasia remains strictly palliative. In view of the suspected autoimmune mechanism of the disease, it appears surprising that no study has systematically addressed the use of immunosuppressive therapy in an attempt to prevent disease progression^[26]. Therefore, current treatment modalities are primarily directed at relieving distal esophageal obstruction and consist of pharmacologic therapy, endoscopic treatment with pneumatic dilation or botulinum toxin injection, and surgery. The appropriate choice of therapeutic options depends on multiple factors, such as the patient’s characteristics, clinical presentation, local expertise and patient preferences, but should be based on the best available evidence.

Pharmacological therapy is directed at achieving a reduction of LES pressure by the use of smooth muscle relaxants, such as calcium channel blockers (e.g. nifedipine 10-30 mg sublingually 30-45 min before meals), nitrates (e.g. isosorbide dinitrate 5 mg sublingually 10-15 min before a meal) or phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors^[27,28]. The main limitations of these agents are their short duration of action, limited improvement of dysphagia despite documented LES relaxation, or the frequent occurrence of side effects, such as peripheral edema, headaches or hypotension, which especially occur with calcium channel blockers and nitrates. Their use is, therefore, limited to symptomatic relief in patients who have very early disease, or as a temporary measure for patients who are awaiting a more definite treatment option, or are high risk for more invasive options^[29].

Endoscopic options of treatment include disruption of the LES by pneumatic dilation or botulinum toxin injection. Botulinum toxin is a potent neurotoxin that leads to a blockade of the release of acetylcholine from excitatory motor neurons. In a landmark study, Pasricha et al^[30] showed that endoscopic injection of botulinum toxin into the area of the LES lead to symptomatic improvement in patients with achalasia, which was accompanied by reduced esophageal retention over a period of 6 mo. One randomized controlled trial (RCT) has shown that the two commercially available formulations of botulinum toxin are equally effective, but need to be given in different dosages because of variable potency^[31]. The treatment effect of one of these formulations (Botox^® Allergan Inc, Irvine, California, USA) might be maximized when a repeated injection of 100 IU is given one month after the first injection^[32]. In contrast, a lack of an initial symptomatic response and residual LES pressure ≥ 18 mmHg after botulinum toxin are associated with a poor overall response^[33].The best results of botulinum toxin have been achieved in patients with vigorous achalasia, older patients and patients whose LES pressures do not exceed ≥ 50% of the upper limit of normal^[23,34]. However, the use of botulinum toxin is limited by its lack of long-term efficacy with recurrence rates of approximately 50% after one year and universal symptomatic relapse at two years^[35,36]. Two recent meta-analyses concluded that although botulinum toxin has an excellent safety profile, it seems slightly less effective than pneumatic dilatation in the short-term and is clearly inferior in the long-term for the  treatment of achalasia^[37,38].

Pneumatic dilatation has been used for the treatment of patients with achalasia for more than half a century and is currently considered the most effective non-surgical treatment for achalasia^[39,40]. A number of different pneumatic dilators with variable balloon compliance have been used in clinical trials. Currently, the low-compliance polyethylene pneumatic dilator (Rigiflex^®, Boston Scientific, Boston, MA, USA) appears to be the most widely used. Although pneumatic dilators from other manufacturers are available (e.g. Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN; USA or Hobbs Medical, Stafford Springs CT, USA; HCDD, latex balloon, Rüsch Inc, Germany), only limited comparative data exist, which have not shown a difference in efficacy or safety^[41,42]. Using a graded approach with the polyethylene balloon dilator, with increasing diameters from 3.0 to 4.0 cm, a 93% response rate was achieved over a mean follow up period of four years with a relatively low complication risk^[43]. The most feared complication of pneumatic dilation is perforation, which occurred in 1.6% of patients in a meta-analysis with 1065 patients in experienced hands^[39,40]. Studies assessing the long-term efficacy of pneumatic dilation have shown that a permanent treatment success can only be achieved in 40%-60% of patients after a follow up of ≥ 15 years^[44-46]. Although one study showed that “on demand” repeat dilations may again lead to remission in the majority of patients^[47], others have shown that longer lasting treatment effects cannot be expected from such therapy^[48].

Predictors of treatment failure with balloon dilation appear to be younger age (< 40 years), male gender, pulmonary symptoms and failed response to one or two initial dilations^[49-52]. In contrast older age appears to be associated with favorable outcomes of pneumatic dilation. Manometric findings that predict poor outcome are high initial LES pressures (e.g. > 15-30 mmHg) or a reduction of LES pressure < 50% after the first dilation^[50,52,53]. Manometry should, therefore, be routinely performed pre- and post-interventionally.

With the advent of minimally invasive laparoscopic approaches, surgery has evolved from an ancillary procedure, used when pneumatic dilation failed, to the favored primary approach by many surgeons and gastroenterologists in a majority of patients with achalasia^[54]. The goal of surgery is to alleviate the esophageal obstruction by myotomy of the LES. To prevent secondary gastroesophageal reflux, the procedure has usually been combined with some type of fundoplication procedure. The superiority of surgical myotomy over pneumatic dilation was suggested by three recent meta-analyses in the English and Chinese literature that mostly considered retrospective cohort studies^[38,39,55]. Although both pneumatic dilation and surgical myotomy have a substantial risk of subsequent need of interventions (repeated pneumatic dilation, surgical myotomy or esophagectomy) over a period of 10 years, the probability was significantly smaller in the latter group (56% vs 26%, respectively) in one study^[56]. To date, only one RCT with data on long-term follow-up has been published by Csendes et al^[57] comparing myotomy followed by 180° Dor fundoplication to pneumatic dilation with a Mosher bag. Although this study has been criticized because of potentially technique-related suboptimal results in the pneumatic dilation group, it still remains the best available evidence to date. The authors showed good response after a five year follow up period for 95% of surgically treated patients vs 65% of patients in the pneumatic dilation group. However, very late results in the surgical group showed that clinical deterioration occurs, reducing the surgical success rate to 75% after a mean follow up of 15.8 years^[58]. Of the patients with poor surgical results, 92% resulted from complications of severe reflux disease and not from incomplete myotomy. A number of trials have, therefore, investigated the benefit of anti-reflux procedures in addition to myotomy. In a prospective RCT, reflux symptoms were reduced from 47.6% with laparoscopic Heller myotomy alone to 9.1% when a Dor fundoplication was added^[59]. In another RCT, laparoscopic myotomy with Dor fundoplication was equally effective as a myotomy with “floppy” Nissen fundoplication in controlling reflux, but dysphagia rates were significantly higher in the latter group (2.8% vs 15%, respectively; P < 0.001)^[60]. With success rates of 47%-82% at 10 years, laparoscopic Heller myotomy with partial fundoplication appears to have evolved into the surgical procedure of choice^[39,61,62]. A recent single center RCT compared laparoscopic cardiomyotomy with partial toupet fundoplication to pneumatic dilation in patients with newly diagnosed achalasia. Similar to the Csendes study, it also showed significantly fewer treatment failures in the surgical arm after a period of 12 mo^[63]. Another head to head multicenter RCT has been ongoing for a number of years, but publication is still pending^[64].

Predictors of a negative outcome with surgical myotomy were severe preoperative dysphagia, lower preoperative LES pressures of < 30-35 mmHg, progressive esophageal body dilation with flask type or sigmoid esophagus, and preoperative endoscopic treatment in some studies^[61,65-68]. However, other studies showed treatment responses even in (selected) patients with dilated esophageal bodies or sigmoid esophagus, and in patients who previously failed pneumatic dilation^[48,69,70]. The effect of surgical myotomy on chest pain remains controversial, and patients should be aware that this symptom might not reliably improve after either pneumatic dilation or surgery^[8]. Occasionally, a temporary placement of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) has been suggested as a possible means of dilation or as a bridge to surgery^[71,72]. However, because no information with regard to its long-term effectiveness exist and complications might be frequent and potentially severe^[73], stent treatment for achalasia cannot be recommended at the present time.

Finally, it should not be forgotten that for patients not responding to any one of the above mentioned therapies, subtotal esophageal resection with gastric pull-up remains as a viable treatment option. Although such therapy is extremely invasive and associated with a high post-operative morbidity, favorable long-term results with significant improvement of symptoms can be achieved, even if endoscopic therapy or surgical myotomy have persistently remained unsuccessful^[74].

COMPLICATIONS AND PROGNOSIS

Complications in patients with achalasia might occur from the natural course of the disease (e.g. aspiration, squamous cell carcinoma, and megaesophagus), from iatrogenic interventions (e.g. perforation after balloon dilation, or postoperative complications after myotomy), or from the late consequences of a successful intervention (e.g. reflux related complications, such as strictures or adenocarcinoma).

As a result of the natural course of the disease, structural parenchymal pulmonary disease occurs in 33% of patients with achalasia, probably from chronic microaspiration. Furthermore, delayed diagnosis, or ineffective intervention, might lead to progressive dilation of the esophagus and the development of a megaesophagus. This complication occurs in 10% of patients at a median of 18-21 years after the onset of symptoms and might require esophagectomy in the most severe cases^[75,76].

In addition, treatment modalities carry their own inherent risks. As previously mentioned, the main risk of pneumatic dilation is perforation, which occurs at a mean of 1.6% (range from 0%-8%), even in experienced hands^[39]. The risk of perforation appears to be highest during initial dilation, as opposed to subsequent dilations^[77]. Although the perforation risk of laparoscopic myotomy is smaller with 0.7% (range 0%-8%), the overall rate of postoperative complications is 6.3%, with a periprocedural mortality of 0.1%^[39]. As a result of endoscopic or surgical treatment, reflux esophagitis occurred in approximately 10% of patients in our own prospective cohort, even though 43% of patients received acid suppressing medications^[76]. Reflux esophagitis was more commonly observed after surgical myotomy with Dor fundoplication (14%) than after pneumatic dilation (5%), possibly indicating more effective disruption of the LES. Late reflux complications, such as esophageal stricture occurred in half of these patients.

The most feared complication of achalasia is esophageal cancer. A recent review of the available literature reported a mean prevalence of esophageal cancer of 3% in patients with achalasia, indicating a fifty-fold increased risk over the general population^[78]. Squamous cell carcinoma appears to occur most commonly, and probably results from stasis, causing bacterial overgrowth and production of nitrosamines, which in turn lead to chronic inflammation, dysplasia and cancer^[79]. In addition, adenocarcinoma may result from long-standing reflux after successful treatment^[80,81]. Although insufficient data are available to make evidence-based surveillance recommendations, many experts support a strategy of surveillance for cancer or reflux complications. Accordingly, the latest ASGE guideline suggests that it would be reasonable to consider such a strategy after 15 years of symptoms^[82]. Annual follow up surveillance intervals have been suggested at least by one author^[77]. Patients should be kept on a liquid diet three to four days before the surveillance endoscopy and an esophageal lavage should be considered immediately before the procedure to optimize visualization. Despite the described cancer risk and frequent long-term complications, patients with achalasia do not appear to experience a significant compromise of their overall life expectancy^[76].

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES

Achalasia is an idiopathic disorder, likely caused by autoimmune mediated destruction of inhibitory neurons in response to an unknown, possibly viral, insult in genetically susceptible individuals. Physicians should be aware of typical and atypical presentations of achalasia to avoid diagnostic delays. Standard diagnostic work-up should include an EGD, timed barium swallow and manometry. Additional testing may become necessary if pseudoachalasia is suspected. The appropriate choice of therapy depends on multiple factors, including local expertise, patient preferences, and known predictors of treatment failures (Table 2). Based on the current evidence, we prefer laparoscopic myotomy in combination with partial fundoplication in young patients (< 40 years) with low surgical risk as the primary treatment option. In older patients, or those who want to avoid surgery, pneumatic dilation produces good long-term results, unless the first one to two dilations are unsuccessful, or LES pressure is not adequately decreased. Botulinum toxin might be especially useful in very old patients, or those with major comorbidities, because of its excellent safety profile. Subsequent treatments should be based on symptom recurrence. Pharmacological therapy should be reserved for patients awaiting a more definite treatment option. For patients not responding to any one of the above mentioned therapies, or patients with megaesophagus, esophageal resection remains a viable option.

In the future, well designed prospective studies are needed to identify optimal treatment options for different subgroups of patients with idiopathic achalasia. The advent of new exciting diagnostic methods, such as HRM, may aid in predicting treatment responses and warrants further investigation. Finally, with growing insight into the pathophysiology of this disease, novel treatment options that aim at preventing the late stages of the disease might evolve.

REFERENCES

1      Howard PJ, Maher L, Pryde A, Cameron EW, Heading RC. Five year prospective study of the incidence, clinical features, and diagnosis of achalasia in Edinburgh. Gut 1992; 33: 1011-1015   PubMed   DOI

2      Eckardt VF. Clinical presentations and complications of achalasia. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2001; 11: 281-292, vi   PubMed 

3      Fisichella PM, Raz D, Palazzo F, Niponmick I, Patti MG. Clinical, radiological, and manometric profile in 145 patients with untreated achalasia. World J Surg 2008; 32: 1974-1979   PubMed   DOI

4      Massey BT, Hogan WJ, Dodds WJ, Dantas RO. Alteration of the upper esophageal sphincter belch reflex in patients with achalasia. Gastroenterology 1992; 103: 1574-1579   PubMed 

5      Spechler SJ, Souza RF, Rosenberg SJ, Ruben RA, Goyal RK. Heartburn in patients with achalasia. Gut 1995; 37: 305-308   PubMed   DOI

6      Smart HL, Foster PN, Evans DF, Slevin B, Atkinson M. Twenty four hour oesophageal acidity in achalasia before and after pneumatic dilatation. Gut 1987; 28: 883-887   PubMed   DOI

7      Seeman H, Traube M. Hiccups and achalasia. Ann Intern Med 1991; 115: 711-712   PubMed 

8      Eckardt VF, Stauf B, Bernhard G. Chest pain in achalasia: patient characteristics and clinical course. Gastroenterology 1999; 116: 1300-1304   PubMed   DOI

9      Mikaeli J, Farrokhi F, Bishehsari F, Mahdavinia M, Malekzadeh R. Gender effect on clinical features of achalasia: a prospective study. BMC Gastroenterol 2006; 6: 12   PubMed   DOI

10    Eckardt VF, Köhne U, Junginger T, Westermeier T. Risk factors for diagnostic delay in achalasia. Dig Dis Sci 1997; 42: 580-585   PubMed   DOI

11    Makharia GK, Seith A, Sharma SK, Sinha A, Goswami P, Aggarwal A, Puri K, Sreenivas V. Structural and functional abnormalities in lungs in patients with achalasia. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2009; 21: 603-608, e20   PubMed   DOI

12    Eckardt VF, Krause J, Bolle D. Gastrointestinal transit and gastric acid secretion in patients with achalasia. Dig Dis Sci 1989; 34: 665-671   PubMed   DOI

13    Annese V, Caruso N, Accadia L, Gabbrielli A, Modoni S, Frusciante V, Federici T. Gallbladder function and gastric liquid emptying in achalasia. Dig Dis Sci 1991; 36: 1116-1120   PubMed   DOI

14    Csendes A, Smok G, Braghetto I, González P, Henríquez A, Csendes P, Pizurno D. Histological studies of Auerbach's plexuses of the oesophagus, stomach, jejunum, and colon in patients with achalasia of the oesophagus: correlation with gastric acid secretion, presence of parietal cells and gastric emptying of solids. Gut 1992; 33: 150-154   PubMed   DOI

15    Wright RA, Swan P. Gastric emptying in achalasia. Scand J Gastroenterol 1991; 26: 798-800   PubMed   DOI

16    Liu W, Fackler W, Rice TW, Richter JE, Achkar E, Goldblum JR. The pathogenesis of pseudoachalasia: a clinicopathologic study of 13 cases of a rare entity. Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26: 784-788   PubMed   DOI

17    Gockel I, Eckardt VF, Schmitt T, Junginger T. Pseudoachalasia: a case series and analysis of the literature. Scand J Gastroenterol 2005; 40: 378-385   PubMed   DOI

18    Eckardt VF, Schmitt T, Kanzler G. Transabdominal ultrasonography in achalasia. Scand J Gastroenterol 2004; 39: 634-637   PubMed   DOI

19    Vaezi MF, Baker ME, Achkar E, Richter JE. Timed barium oesophagram: better predictor of long term success after pneumatic dilation in achalasia than symptom assessment. Gut 2002; 50: 765-770   PubMed   DOI

20    Goldenberg SP, Burrell M, Fette GG, Vos C, Traube M. Classic and vigorous achalasia: a comparison of manometric, radiographic, and clinical findings. Gastroenterology 1991; 101: 743-748   PubMed 

21    Camacho-Lobato L, Katz PO, Eveland J, Vela M, Castell DO. Vigorous achalasia: original description requires minor change. J Clin Gastroenterol 2001; 33: 375-377   PubMed   DOI

22    Patti MG, Galvani C, Gorodner MV, Tedesco P. Timing of surgical intervention does not influence return of esophageal peristalsis or outcome for patients with achalasia. Surg Endosc 2005; 19: 1188-1192   PubMed   DOI

23    Pasricha PJ, Rai R, Ravich WJ, Hendrix TR, Kalloo AN. Botulinum toxin for achalasia: long-term outcome and predictors of response. Gastroenterology 1996; 110: 1410-1415   PubMed   DOI

24    Hirano I, Tatum RP, Shi G, Sang Q, Joehl RJ, Kahrilas PJ. Manometric heterogeneity in patients with idiopathic achalasia. Gastroenterology 2001; 120: 789-798   PubMed   DOI

25    Pandolfino JE, Kwiatek MA, Nealis T, Bulsiewicz W, Post J, Kahrilas PJ. Achalasia: a new clinically relevant classification by high-resolution manometry. Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 1526-1533   PubMed   DOI

26    De Giorgio R, Guerrini S, Barbara G, Stanghellini V, De Ponti F, Corinaldesi R, Moses PL, Sharkey KA, Mawe GM. Inflammatory neuropathies of the enteric nervous system. Gastroenterology 2004; 126: 1872-1883   PubMed   DOI

27    Hoogerwerf WA, Pasricha PJ. Pharmacologic therapy in treating achalasia. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2001; 11: 311-324, vii   PubMed 

28    Bortolotti M, Mari C, Lopilato C, Porrazzo G, Miglioli M. Effects of sildenafil on esophageal motility of patients with idiopathic achalasia. Gastroenterology 2000; 118: 253-257   PubMed   DOI

29    Annese V, Bassotti G. Non-surgical treatment of esophageal achalasia. World J Gastroenterol 2006; 12: 5763-5766   PubMed 

30    Pasricha PJ, Ravich WJ, Hendrix TR, Sostre S, Jones B, Kalloo AN. Intrasphincteric botulinum toxin for the treatment of achalasia. N Engl J Med 1995; 332: 774-778   PubMed   DOI

31    Annese V, Bassotti G, Coccia G, D'onofrio V, Gatto G, Repici A, Andriulli A. Comparison of two different formulations of botulinum toxin A for the treatment of oesophageal achalasia. The Gismad Achalasia Study Group. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1999; 13: 1347-1350   PubMed   DOI

32    Annese V, Bassotti G, Coccia G, Dinelli M, D'Onofrio V, Gatto G, Leandro G, Repici A, Testoni PA, Andriulli A. A multicentre randomised study of intrasphincteric botulinum toxin in patients with oesophageal achalasia. GISMAD Achalasia Study Group. Gut 2000; 46: 597-600   PubMed   DOI

33    Kolbasnik J, Waterfall WE, Fachnie B, Chen Y, Tougas G. Long-term efficacy of Botulinum toxin in classical achalasia: a prospective study. Am J Gastroenterol 1999; 94: 3434-3439   PubMed   DOI

34    Neubrand M, Scheurlen C, Schepke M, Sauerbruch T. Long-term results and prognostic factors in the treatment of achalasia with botulinum toxin. Endoscopy 2002; 34: 519-523   PubMed   DOI

35    Boeckxstaens GE. Achalasia. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2007; 21: 595-608   PubMed   DOI

36    Allescher HD, Storr M, Seige M, Gonzales-Donoso R, Ott R, Born P, Frimberger E, Weigert N, Stier A, Kurjak M, Rösch T, Classen M. Treatment of achalasia: botulinum toxin injection vs. pneumatic balloon dilation. A prospective study with long-term follow-Up. Endoscopy 2001; 33: 1007-1017   PubMed   DOI

37    Leyden JE, Moss AC, MacMathuna P. Endoscopic pneumatic dilation versus botulinum toxin injection in the management of primary achalasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; CD005046   PubMed   DOI

38    Wang L, Li YM, Li L. Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Controlled Treatment Trials for Achalasia. Dig Dis Sci 2008; Epub ahead of print   PubMed   DOI

39    Campos GM, Vittinghoff E, Rabl C, Takata M, Gadenstätter M, Lin F, Ciovica R. Endoscopic and surgical treatments for achalasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 2009; 249: 45-57   PubMed   DOI

40    Kadakia SC, Wong RK. Pneumatic balloon dilation for esophageal achalasia. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2001; 11: 325-346, vii   PubMed 

41    Becker K, Biesenbach S, Erckenbrecht JF, Frieling T. Effect of balloon compliance on symptomatic success of pneumatic dilation in achalasia patients. Z Gastroenterol 2001; 39: 831-836   PubMed   DOI

42    Muehldorfer SM, Hahn EG, Ell C. High- and low-compliance balloon dilators in patients with achalasia: a randomized prospective comparative trial. Gastrointest Endosc 1996; 44: 398-403   PubMed   DOI

43    Kadakia SC, Wong RK. Graded pneumatic dilation using Rigiflex achalasia dilators in patients with primary esophageal achalasia. Am J Gastroenterol 1993; 88: 34-38   PubMed 

44    West RL, Hirsch DP, Bartelsman JF, de Borst J, Ferwerda G, Tytgat GN, Boeckxstaens GE. Long term results of pneumatic dilation in achalasia followed for more than 5 years. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 1346-1351   PubMed   DOI

45    Chan KC, Wong SK, Lee DW, Mui WL, Chan AC, Ng EK, Wu JC, Sung JJ, Chung SC. Short-term and long-term results of endoscopic balloon dilation for achalasia: 12 years' experience. Endoscopy 2004; 36: 690-694   PubMed   DOI

46    Karamanolis G, Sgouros S, Karatzias G, Papadopoulou E, Vasiliadis K, Stefanidis G, Mantides A. Long-term outcome of pneumatic dilation in the treatment of achalasia. Am J Gastroenterol 2005; 100: 270-274   PubMed   DOI

47    Zerbib F, Thétiot V, Richy F, Benajah DA, Message L, Lamouliatte H. Repeated pneumatic dilations as long-term maintenance therapy for esophageal achalasia. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 692-697   PubMed   DOI

48    Gockel I, Junginger T, Bernhard G, Eckardt VF. Heller myotomy for failed pneumatic dilation in achalasia: how effective is it? Ann Surg 2004; 239: 371-377   PubMed   DOI

49    Eckardt VF, Aignherr C, Bernhard G. Predictors of outcome in patients with achalasia treated by pneumatic dilation. Gastroenterology 1992; 103: 1732-1738   PubMed 

50    Eckardt VF, Gockel I, Bernhard G. Pneumatic dilation for achalasia: late results of a prospective follow up investigation. Gut 2004; 53: 629-633   PubMed   DOI

51    Farhoomand K, Connor JT, Richter JE, Achkar E, Vaezi MF. Predictors of outcome of pneumatic dilation in achalasia. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004; 2: 389-394   PubMed   DOI

52    Dağli U, Kuran S, Savaş N, Ozin Y, Alkim C, Atalay F, Sahin B. Factors predicting outcome of balloon dilatation in achalasia. Dig Dis Sci 2009; 54: 1237-1242   PubMed   DOI

53    Ghoshal UC, Kumar S, Saraswat VA, Aggarwal R, Misra A, Choudhuri G. Long-term follow-up after pneumatic dilation for achalasia cardia: factors associated with treatment failure and recurrence. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99: 2304-2310   PubMed   DOI

54    SSAT patient care guidelines. Esophageal achalasia. J Gastrointest Surg 2007; 11: 1210-1212   PubMed   DOI

55    Wang L, Li YM, Li L, Yu CH. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Chinese literature for the treatment of achalasia. World J Gastroenterol 2008; 14: 5900-5906   PubMed 

56    Lopushinsky SR, Urbach DR. Pneumatic dilatation and surgical myotomy for achalasia. JAMA 2006; 296: 2227-2233   PubMed   DOI

57    Csendes A, Braghetto I, Henríquez A, Cortés C. Late results of a prospective randomised study comparing forceful dilatation and oesophagomyotomy in patients with achalasia. Gut 1989; 30: 299-304   PubMed   DOI

58    Csendes A, Braghetto I, Burdiles P, Korn O, Csendes P, Henríquez A. Very late results of esophagomyotomy for patients with achalasia: clinical, endoscopic, histologic, manometric, and acid reflux studies in 67 patients for a mean follow-up of 190 months. Ann Surg 2006; 243: 196-203   PubMed   DOI

59    Richards WO, Torquati A, Holzman MD, Khaitan L, Byrne D, Lutfi R, Sharp KW. Heller myotomy versus Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication for achalasia: a prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial. Ann Surg 2004; 240: 405-412; discussion 412-415   PubMed   DOI

60    Rebecchi F, Giaccone C, Farinella E, Campaci R, Morino M. Randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic Heller myotomy plus Dor fundoplication versus Nissen fundoplication for achalasia: long-term results. Ann Surg 2008; 248: 1023-1030   PubMed   DOI

61    Zaninotto G, Costantini M, Rizzetto C, Zanatta L, Guirroli E, Portale G, Nicoletti L, Cavallin F, Battaglia G, Ruol A, Ancona E. Four hundred laparoscopic myotomies for esophageal achalasia: a single centre experience. Ann Surg 2008; 248: 986-993   PubMed   DOI

62    Jeansonne LO, White BC, Pilger KE, Shane MD, Zagorski S, Davis SS, Hunter JG, Lin E, Smith CD. Ten-year follow-up of laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia shows durability. Surg Endosc 2007; 21: 1498-1502   PubMed   DOI

63    Kostic S, Kjellin A, Ruth M, Lönroth H, Johnsson E, Andersson M, Lundell L. Pneumatic dilatation or laparoscopic cardiomyotomy in the management of newly diagnosed idiopathic achalasia. Results of a randomized controlled trial. World J Surg 2007; 31: 470-478   PubMed   DOI

64    Pohl D, Tutuian R. Achalasia: an overview of diagnosis and treatment. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2007; 16: 297-303   PubMed 

65    Torquati A, Richards WO, Holzman MD, Sharp KW. Laparoscopic myotomy for achalasia: predictors of successful outcome after 200 cases. Ann Surg 2006; 243: 587-591; discussion 591-593   PubMed   DOI

66    Omura N, Kashiwagi H, Tsuboi K, Ishibashi Y, Kawasaki N, Yano F, Suzuki Y, Yanaga K. Therapeutic effects of a laparoscopic Heller myotomy and Dor fundoplication on the chest pain associated with achalasia. Surg Today 2006; 36: 235-240   PubMed   DOI

67    Khajanchee YS, Kanneganti S, Leatherwood AE, Hansen PD, Swanström LL. Laparoscopic Heller myotomy with Toupet fundoplication: outcomes predictors in 121 consecutive patients. Arch Surg 2005; 140: 827-833; discussion 833-834   PubMed   DOI

68    Schuchert MJ, Luketich JD, Landreneau RJ, Kilic A, Gooding WE, Alvelo-Rivera M, Christie NA, Gilbert S, Pennathur A. Minimally-invasive esophagomyotomy in 200 consecutive patients: factors influencing postoperative outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85: 1729-1734   PubMed   DOI

69    Sweet MP, Nipomnick I, Gasper WJ, Bagatelos K, Ostroff JW, Fisichella PM, Way LW, Patti MG. The outcome of laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia is not influenced by the degree of esophageal dilatation. J Gastrointest Surg 2008; 12: 159-165   PubMed   DOI

70    Mineo TC, Pompeo E. Long-term outcome of Heller myotomy in achalasic sigmoid esophagus. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004; 128: 402-407   PubMed   DOI

71    Zhao JG, Li YD, Cheng YS, Li MH, Chen NW, Chen WX, Shang KZ. Long-term safety and outcome of a temporary self-expanding metallic stent for achalasia: a prospective study with a 13-year single-center experience. Eur Radiol 2009; 19: 1973-1980   PubMed   DOI

72    Díaz Roca AB, Sampascual SB, Calderón AJ, Menéndez F, Varela JI, Baranda A, Ruíz P, de Zarate JO, Bravo M, Hijona L, Orive V. Self-expanding esophageal prostheses as an alternative temporary treatment for achalasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 980   PubMed   DOI

73    De Palma GD, lovino P, Masone S, Persico M, Persico G. Self-expanding metal stents for endoscopic treatment of esophageal achalasia unresponsive to conventional treatments. Long-term results in eight patients. Endoscopy 2001; 33: 1027-1030   PubMed   DOI

74    Gockel I, Kneist W, Eckardt VF, Oberholzer K, Junginger T. Subtotal esophageal resection in motility disorders of the esophagus. Dig Dis 2004; 22: 396-401   PubMed   DOI

75    Orringer MB, Stirling MC. Esophageal resection for achalasia: indications and results. Ann Thorac Surg 1989; 47: 340-345   PubMed 

76    Eckardt VF, Hoischen T, Bernhard G. Life expectancy, complications, and causes of death in patients with achalasia: results of a 33-year follow-up investigation. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 20: 956-960   PubMed   DOI

77    Metman EH, Lagasse JP, d'Alteroche L, Picon L, Scotto B, Barbieux JP. Risk factors for immediate complications after progressive pneumatic dilation for achalasia. Am J Gastroenterol 1999; 94: 1179-1185   PubMed   DOI

78    Dunaway PM, Wong RK. Risk and surveillance intervals for squamous cell carcinoma in achalasia. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2001; 11: 425-434, ix   PubMed 

79    Sandler RS, Nyrén O, Ekbom A, Eisen GM, Yuen J, Josefsson S. The risk of esophageal cancer in patients with achalasia. A population-based study. JAMA 1995; 274: 1359-1362   PubMed   DOI

80    Zendehdel K, Nyrén O, Edberg A, Ye W. Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma in Achalasia Patients, a Retrospective Cohort Study in Sweden. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; [Epub ahead of print]   PubMed   DOI

81    Brücher BL, Stein HJ, Bartels H, Feussner H, Siewert JR. Achalasia and esophageal cancer: incidence, prevalence, and prognosis. World J Surg 2001; 25: 745-749   PubMed   DOI

82    Hirota WK, Zuckerman MJ, Adler DG, Davila RE, Egan J, Leighton JA, Qureshi WA, Rajan E, Fanelli R, Wheeler-Harbaugh J, Baron TH, Faigel DO. ASGE guideline: the role of endoscopy in the surveillance of premalignant conditions of the upper GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 570-580   PubMed   DOI

S- Editor  Li LF    L- Editor  Stewart GJ    E- Editor  Yin DH

Reviews	Add
more>>