Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23599318›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2013

Minimal access surgery compared with medical management for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: five year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial (REFLUX).

A M Grant, S C Cotton, C Boachie, C R Ramsay, Z H Krukowski, R C Heading, M K Campbell, REFLUX Trial Group

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Longer-term outcomes of gastroesophageal reflux disease treated with magnetic sphincter augmentation.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

A M GrantHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, UK.
S C Cotton
C Boachie
C R Ramsay
Z H Krukowski
R C Heading
M K Campbell
REFLUX Trial Group

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the long term clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic fundoplication as an alternative to drug treatment for chronic gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD).

designFive year follow-up of multicentre, pragmatic randomised trial (with parallel non-randomised preference groups).

settingInitial recruitment in 21 UK hospitals.

participantsResponders to annual questionnaires among 810 original participants. At entry, all had had GORD for >12 months.

interventionThe surgeon chose the type of fundoplication. Medical therapy was reviewed and optimised by a specialist. Subsequent management was at the discretion of the clinician responsible for care, usually in primary care.

main outcome measuresPrimary outcome measure was self reported quality of life score on disease-specific REFLUX questionnaire. Other measures were health status (with SF-36 and EuroQol EQ-5D questionnaires), use of antireflux medication, and complications.

resultsBy five years, 63% (112/178) of patients randomised to surgery and 13% (24/179) of those randomised to medical management had received a fundoplication (plus 85% (222/261) and 3% (6/192) of those who expressed a preference for surgery and for medical management). Among responders at 5 years, 44% (56/127) of those randomised to surgery were taking antireflux medication versus 82% (98/119) of those randomised to medical management. Differences in the REFLUX score significantly favoured the randomised surgery group (mean difference 8.5 (95% CI 3.9 to 13.1), P<0.001, at five years). SF-36 and EQ-5D scores also favoured surgery, but were not statistically significant at five years. After fundoplication, 3% (12/364) had surgical treatment for a complication and 4% (16) had subsequent reflux-related operations-most often revision of the wrap. Long term rates of dysphagia, flatulence, and inability to vomit were similar in the two randomised groups.

conclusionsAfter five years, laparoscopic fundoplication continued to provide better relief of GORD symptoms than medical management. Adverse effects of surgery were uncommon and generally observed soon after surgery. A small proportion had re-operations. There was no evidence of long term adverse symptoms caused by surgery.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN15517081.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleFollow-Up StudiesFundoplicationGastroesophageal RefluxHealth StatusHumansMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID23599318
PMCPMC3629902

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.