Skip to main content
. 2023 Apr 4;11(4):E322–E329. doi: 10.1055/a-1980-9942

Table 1. Study details and demographics of included patients.

Study, year Landreneau, 2019 Pioppo, 2021 AbiMansour, 2020 Clapp, 2022
Type of study Case control study Retrospective Retrospective Prospective
Interventions Group 1: G-POEM
Group 2: Laparoscopic pyloroplasty
Group 1: G-POEM
Group 2: Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy
Group 1: G-POEM
Group 2: pyloromyotomy
Group 1: G-POEM
Group 2: Robotic pyloromyotomy
Total patients Group 1: 30
Group 2: 30
Group 1: 39
Group 2: 63
Group 1: 84
Group 2: 28
Group 1: 63
Group 2: 48
Mean age, (SD) Group 1: 44.1 (13.5)
Group 2: 45.4 (14.5)
Group 1: 49 (16.5)
Group 2: 45.8 (10.3)
Group 1: 50.6 (16.9)
Group 2: 46.2 (17.4)
Group 1: 43.9 (14.1)
Group 2: 47.4 (12.4)
Female (%) Group 1: 23 (76.7 %)
Group 2: (76.7 %)
Group 1: 33 (84.6 %)
Group 2: 36 (57.1 %)
Group 1: 63 (75.0 %)
Group 2: 22 (78.6 %)
Group 1: 53 (84.1 %)
Group 2: 44 (91.7 %)
Mean BMI, (SD) Group 1: 24.9 (7.1)
Group 2: 26.1 (6.7)
Group 1: 27.7 (7.7)
Group 2: 27.6 (7.5)
Group 1: 6.09 (25.1)
Group 2: 25.1 (5.2)
Group 1: 28.7 (8.2)
Group 2: 27.3 (5.5)
Etiology of Gastroparesis Diabetic Group 1: 5
Group 2: 5
Group 1: 13
Group 2: 14
Group 1: 23
Group 2: 3
Group 1: NR
Group 2: NR
Postsurgical Group 1: 6
Group 2: 6
Group 1: 4
Group 2: 16
Group 1: 23
Group 2: 12
Group 1: NR
Group 2: NR
Idiopathic/ unknown Group 1: 19
Group 2: 19
Group 1: 22
Group 2: 33
Group 1: 38
Group 2: 13
Group 1: NR
Group 2: NR
Length of follow-up 90 days Postoperative NR 90 days

BMI, body mass index; G-POEM, gastric per-oral endoscopic myotomy; NR, not reported; SD, standard deviation.