Dysphagia with weight loss: when 'achalasia' is not achalasia
A 68-year-old retired teacher presents with 5 months of progressive dysphagia, now only to solids, and 9 kg of unintentional weight loss. He has a 45-pack-year smoking history and no heartburn or regurgitation. Examination shows temporal wasting but is otherwise unremarkable; haemoglobin is 11.9 g/dL and albumin 38 g/L. Upper endoscopy shows a mildly narrowed esophagogastric junction that resists insufflation, with no mucosal lesion; four-quadrant biopsies from the cardia are reported as normal. High-resolution manometry shows absent peristalsis in all swallows, an integrated relaxation pressure of 29 mmHg (normal <15), and pan-esophageal pressurization. The reporting fellow labels this 'type II achalasia' and schedules pneumatic dilation in two weeks. The patient asks whether the weight loss is 'just from not eating'. No cross-sectional imaging has been ordered.
1. Is the manometric diagnosis sufficient to proceed directly with pneumatic dilation? State your next step and justify it.
Read the worked answer
The manometry is compatible with type II achalasia, but compatibility is not the same as diagnosis. Three features should stop the fellow: age over 60, a short history (under 6 months), and weight loss exceeding 5 kg. Each independently raises the probability that the obstruction is malignant rather than primary achalasia. In pseudoachalasia a tumour at the cardia or distal esophagus mimics the manometric pattern because the smooth muscle segment is infiltrated or the submucosal plexus is involved; manometry cannot distinguish the two.
The immediate next step is cross-sectional imaging, preferably contrast-enhanced CT of chest and upper abdomen, plus repeat endoscopy with deeper and more numerous biopsies, including jumbo forceps samples from the narrowed segment and cardia. Superficial mucosal biopsies are frequently negative when the tumour is submucosal or extraluminal, so a negative biopsy does not exclude malignancy. If CT is indeterminate, endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration of wall thickening or nodes is the test that resolves the question.
Pneumatic dilation before excluding malignancy is a serious error: it can perforate a neoplastic esophagus, seed tumour along a tear, and delay curative treatment. The teaching point is that achalasia is a diagnosis of exclusion in older patients with alarm features; the manometric label is a hypothesis until imaging and histology agree.
2. The CT shows circumferential distal esophageal wall thickening with two enlarged paraesophageal nodes. How does this change management, and what is the role of EUS-FNA and repeat biopsies?
Read the worked answer
The case is now presumed malignant distal esophageal or esophagogastric junction carcinoma until proven otherwise, and the plan moves from palliation of motility to oncological staging. Repeat endoscopy with multiple biopsies of the thickened segment is required for histological confirmation; if the mucosa is intact, EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration of the wall thickening and of the paraesophageal nodes gives a tissue diagnosis and simultaneously provides T and N staging. FNA of nodes is preferred over core biopsy in this location for safety, although a core sample may be needed if immunohistochemistry is required.
Staging should then be completed with CT of chest, abdomen and pelvis and PET-CT if available to exclude distant disease. If there is no distant metastasis and the patient is fit, the standard pathway is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery for locally advanced disease, with staging laparoscopy for junctional tumours to exclude occult peritoneal disease. Nutrition must be addressed early: a 9 kg loss means significant risk, and a feeding jejunostomy or stent may be needed depending on the plan.
Dilation is absolutely contraindicated. Even if the patient asks only for relief of dysphagia, the correct answer is that treating the obstruction without treating the tumour forfeits the only chance of cure. If curative treatment is impossible, then endoscopic stenting is appropriate palliation.
3. If imaging and biopsies had been entirely normal, how would you choose among pneumatic dilation, POEM and laparoscopic Heller myotomy for this man?
Read the worked answer
With genuine type II achalasia and no malignancy, all three options are reasonable and the choice rests on local expertise, patient preference and the need for reflux control. Type II achalasia has the best response to any disruption of the lower esophageal sphincter, with success above 90% for POEM and Heller and roughly 80-85% for a graded pneumatic dilation series.
Pneumatic dilation is the least invasive, done as an outpatient, and is attractive in a patient with comorbidity; the trade-off is a perforation risk of about 1-3% and a need for repeat dilations in a substantial minority. POEM gives a durable single-procedure result and is excellent for type II disease, but it produces a longer myotomy and more reflux, so post-procedure surveillance for reflux disease is needed, and it is less suitable if there is a large hiatal hernia or prior intervention. Laparoscopic Heller myotomy with a partial fundoplication has the longest evidence base, lowest reflux rate and excellent durability, at the cost of general anaesthesia and a short admission.
The deciding factors here are the patient's age and fitness, the absence of prior treatment, and the availability of an experienced operator: outcomes are operator-dependent more than technique-dependent. Whichever is chosen, follow-up should include symptom scoring and surveillance for reflux and for late recurrence, and the patient should be told that none of the options cures the underlying neurodegeneration.