Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21643878›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2011

Endoscopic assessment of failed fundoplication: a case for standardization.

Arpad Juhasz, Abhishek Sundaram, Masato Hoshino, Tommy H Lee, Charles J Filipi, Sumeet K Mittal

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. ACG Clinical Guidelines: Clinical Use of Esophageal Physiologic Testing.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2020
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Variability in endoscopic assessment of Nissen fundoplication wrap integrity and hiatus herniation.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2022
    Article
  7. ENDOSCOPIC EVALUATION OF POST-FUNDOPLICATION ANATOMY AND CORRELATION WITH SYMPTOMATOLOGY.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2021
    Article
  8. Screening for Barrett's Oesophagus: Are We Ready for it?Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Endoscopic Evaluation of Post-Fundoplication Anatomy.Current gastroenterology reports · 2017
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. High-resolution manometry patterns of lower esophageal sphincter complex in symptomatic post-fundoplication patients.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2012
    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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Arpad JuhaszDepartment of Surgery, Creighton University Medical Center, 601 North 30th Street, Suite 3700, Omaha, NE 68131, USA.
Abhishek Sundaram
Masato Hoshino
Tommy H Lee
Charles J Filipi
Sumeet K Mittal
CHI Health Creighton University Medical Center - Bergan Mercy · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreoperative endoscopic assessment of the failed fundoplication is instrumental in diagnosis and surgical management. Endoscopy is a routine and essential part of the workup for a failed fundoplication, but no clear guidelines exist for reporting endoscopic findings. This study aimed to compare endoscopic findings reported by community physicians (gastroenterologists and surgeons) with the findings of the authors (esophageal center) for patients who underwent reoperative intervention after a previous antireflux procedure.

methodsRetrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was performed to identify patients who underwent reoperation after a failed antireflux operation between 1 December 2003 and 30 June 2010. Endoscopic findings as reported by the outside physician and by the esophageal center endoscopist were reviewed and compared.

resultsDuring the study period, 229 patients underwent reoperation. Of these patients, 20 did not have endoscopy performed by an outside physician and were excluded from the study, leaving 208 patients. The endoscopic reports of the esophageal center physician included 97 cases of hiatal hernia (64 type 1 and 33 types 2 and 3), 52 slipped fundoplications, 61 disrupted fundoplications, 30 intrathoracic fundoplications, 25 twisted fundoplications, 14 two-compartment stomachs, and 27 cases of Barrett's esophagus. Outside physicians identified 68% of the hiatal hernias and 61% of the paraesophageal hernias reported by the authors. Only 32% of the outside reports mentioned a previous fundoplication. Furthermore, only 17% of the slipped fundoplications and 30% of the disrupted fundoplications were so described. Outside physicians identified 19 of the 27 patients with Barrett's esophagus.

conclusionFundoplication changes described by the general endoscopist are inadequate. With an increasing population of patients who have undergone prior antireflux surgery, incorporation of fundoplication assessment in an endoscopic curriculum may be helpful.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBarrett EsophagusEsophagitisEsophagoscopyFemaleFundoplicationGastroesophageal RefluxHernia, HiatalHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID21643878
OpenAlexW2169753563

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.