ArticleDysphagia2005
Proximal esophageal contractions in laryngectomized patients.
Article in Dysphagia, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Correlation of deglutitive striated esophagus motor function and pharyngeal phase swallowing biomechanical events.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2024Article
- Article
- Quality of life among total laryngectomized patients undergoing speech rehabilitation: correlation between several instruments.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2020Observational
- Multivariable analysis of risk factors for enlargement of the tracheoesophageal puncture after total laryngectomy.Head & neck · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
After laryngectomy for treatment of laryngeal cancer, the distal esophageal contractions have low amplitude. Our hypothesis is that proximal esophageal contractions are also impaired. We studied the proximal esophageal contractions in 20 laryngectomized patients (16 men) with a mean age of 44.2 years, 12 rehabilitated patients with esophageal speech, and 12 controls (7 men, mean age of 46.5 years). We used the manometric method with continuous perfusion. All subjects were studied in the sitting position and performed five swallows of a 5-ml bolus of water alternated with five dry swallows. The contractions were measured 2 cm below the high-pressure zone of the pharyngoesophageal transition. The results showed that the amplitude and duration of contractions were different in laryngectomized patients compared with controls. The amplitude of contractions of patients (wet swallows: 37.3+/-20.7 mmHg, mean+/-SD) was lower than that of controls (81.1+/-31.7 mmHg). The duration of contractions was also lower in laryngectomized patients (2.2+/-0.7 s) than in controls (2.6+/-0.6 s). We conclude that the proximal esophageal contraction amplitude and duration of laryngectomized patients are lower than controls, a fact suggesting that laryngectomy may affect the proximal esophageal contractions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.