Effect and safety of mark-guided vs standard peroral endoscopic myotomy: A retrospective case control study

Figure 1 Flow chart.

Figure 2 High-resolution manometry, Eckart score and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores at 3-mo follow-up in the mark-guided peroral endoscopic myotomy group and standard peroral endoscopic myotomy group. A-D: The pre-operative high-resolution manometry and Eckart scores were significantly decreased compared with the postoperative values in the two groups (all P < 0.001); E, F: The pre-operative 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores were significantly improved compared with the postoperative values in both groups (all P < 0.001).

Figure 3 Barium esophagography at 3-mo follow-up in the mark-guided peroral endoscopic myotomy group and standard peroral endoscopic myotomy group. A-D: The post-operative height and diameter of barium esophagography were significantly decreased compared with the pre-operative values in the two groups (all P < 0.001); E: The pre-operative Gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire score was significantly decreased compared with the post-operative value in the standard peroral endoscopic myotomy group (P = 0.01); F: No significant difference was observed between pre-operative and post-operative values in the mark-guided peroral endoscopic myotomy group (P = 0.09).