Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16718833›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2006

Controversies in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux and achalasia.

Kurt-E Roberts, Andrew-J Duffy, Robert-L Bell

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Recent trends in endoscopic management of achalasia.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2014
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A controversy that has been tough to swallow: is the treatment of achalasia now digested?Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2010
    Review
  9. Single-site Nissen fundoplication versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kurt-E RobertsDepartment of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, 40 Temple St. Suite 3A, New Haven, CT 06510, USA.
Andrew-J Duffy
Robert-L Bell
Yale University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The immense success of laparoscopic surgery as an effective treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and achalasia has established minimal invasive surgery as the gold standard for these two conditions with lower morbidity and mortality, shorter hospital stay, faster convalescence, and less postoperative pain. One controversy in the treatment of GERD evolves around laparoscopic antireflux surgery (LARS) as the preferred treatment for Barrett's esophagus and the procedure's potential to reduce the risk of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. GERD has also been associated with respiratory symptoms, asthma and laryngeal injury, and a second controversy prompts discussions about whether total or partial fundoplication is the more appropriate treatment for GERD. A new and promising alternative in the treatment of GERD is endoluminal therapy. Three types of this new treatment option will be discussed: radiofrequency energy delivered to the lower esophageal sphincter, the creation of a mechanical barrier at the gastroesophageal junction, and the direct endoscopic tightening of the lower esophageal sphincter. Laparoscopic surgery is discussed not only as a very effective treatment for GERD but also as permanent cure for achalasia. This review analyzes the three most important treatment options for achalasia: medications, pneumatic dilatation, and surgical therapy. Medications as the only true non-invasive option in the treatment of achalasia are not as effective as LARS because of their short half-life and variable absorption due to the poor esophageal emptying. The second treatment option, pneumatic dilatation, involves the stretching of the lower esophagus and is still considered the most effective non-surgical treatment for achalasia. Finally, surgical therapy for achalasia and the two major controversies concerning this laparoscopic treatment are discussed. The first involves the extent to which the myotomy is extended onto the stomach, and the second concerns the necessity and type of antireflux procedure to prevent GERD after myotomy. LARS and laparoscopic Heller myotomy are the agreed upon as the gold standards for surgical treatment of GERD and achalasia, respectively. In the hands of an experienced laparoscopic surgeon both are safe and effective treatments for patients with excellent subjective and objective long-term results with at least 90% patient satisfaction.

Indexed as

AngioplastyDilatationEsophageal AchalasiaGastroesophageal RefluxHumansLaparoscopyTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID16718833
PMCPMC4087956
OpenAlexW166396214

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.