Background: Long-term patient-reported outcomes following surgery for achalasia are lacking in the literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate both short-and long-term outcomes of the surgical management of achalasia. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of all surgically managed achalasia cases from January 2004 to December 2017. Data collection included demographics, previous interventions, type of surgery performed, and postoperative outcomes. Long-term data collected by questionnaire included residual regurgitation, dysphagia, chest pain, heartburn, need for subsequent intervention, and overall satisfaction. Patients were divided into primary group (group P) and secondary group (group S) based on whether they had undergone a previous intervention. Results: Ninety-one patients (male : female = 43 : 49; group P : S = 66 : 25) underwent surgery for achalasia. The median follow-up was 107 months (32-172 months). Twenty-five patients (27.5%) had previous interventions. Eighty-nine (97.8%) underwent Heller cardiomyotomy; the procedure was laparoscopic in 86 cases (97%) and open in three patients (3.3%). Two patients underwent stapled cardiomyotomy. The postoperative complication rate was 4.4%, and no complications were serious. There was no significant difference in length of stay between the groups. Short-term followup showed that most residual symptoms were mild. During long-term follow-up, the residual symptoms were mainly mild and did not differ between the groups. Furthermore, 72.9% of patients were satisfied or very satisfied with their symptoms post-surgery. Conclusion: The peri-operative morbidity for the surgical management of achalasia is low and re-intervention is uncommon. Heartburn was not a major long-term sequela of myotomy. Though patients still experienced mild symptoms in the longer term, most were satisfied with their outcome.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.