Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19606244›Full record

Trial reportClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2009

Variation of the intercellular space in the esophageal epithelium in response to hydrochloridric acid infusion in patients with erosive esophagitis.

Ricardo Tedeschi Matos, Rodrigo Schuler Honório, Elia Garcia Caldini, Claudio Lyoiti Hashimoto, Marcelo Alves Ferreira, Tomás Navarro-Rodriguez

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 43% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ricardo Tedeschi MatosDepartment of Gastroenterology, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo/SP, Brazil. ritedeschi@yahoo.com.br
Rodrigo Schuler Honório
Elia Garcia Caldini
Claudio Lyoiti Hashimoto
Marcelo Alves Ferreira
Tomás Navarro-Rodriguez
Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BRYahoo (Spain) · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledThe purpose of this study was to compare esophageal infusion with 0.1 N hydrochloric acid (HCl) to esophageal infusion with saline in patients presenting with typical gastroesophageal reflux symptoms and erosive esophagitis.

methodsUpper gastrointestinal endoscopy was performed on 44 prospective subjects, 29 of whom were included in the study. Eighteen patients presented with normal esophagi (Control Group "C"), nine of whom were infused with HCl and nine with saline. Eleven patients presented with erosive esophagitis (Lesion Group "L"), five of whom were infused with HCl and six with saline. Biopsies of the esophageal mucosa were collected before and after infusions.

resultsNo statistically significant difference was found between the two types of infusions in terms of the dilation of the intercellular space of the esophageal epithelium, regardless of the status of the patient.

conclusionsResponse to HCl infusion cannot be used as a marker for gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Indexed as

Hydrochloric AcidSodium ChlorideAdolescentAdultAgedBiopsyEpitheliumEsophagitisEsophagusExtracellular SpaceFemaleGastroesophageal RefluxHumansMicroscopy, ElectronMiddle AgedMucous MembraneHydrochloric AcidSodium ChlorideDilatedEpitheliumEsophagusGastroesophageal RefluxIntercellular Space

Identifiers

PMID19606244
PMCPMC2710441
OpenAlexW1987192498

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.