Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24078388›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2013

Anatomophysiology of the pharyngo-upper esophageal area in light of high-resolution manometry.

Luciana C Silva, Fernando A M Herbella, Luciano R Neves, Fernando P P Vicentine, Sebastião P Neto, Marco G Patti

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A systematic review of current methodology of high resolution pharyngeal manometry with and without impedance.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Oropharyngeal dysphagia: manifestations and diagnosis.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2016
    Review
  13. High-Resolution Manometry Evaluation of the Pharynx and Upper Esophageal Sphincter Motility in Patients with Achalasia.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2015
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Upper esophageal sphincter resting pressure varies during esophageal manometry.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery
    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.

Luciana C Silva
Fernando A M Herbella
Luciano R Neves
Fernando P P Vicentine
Sebastião P Neto
Marco G Patti

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe motility of the pharynx, upper esophageal sphincter (UES), and proximal esophagus is still poorly understood. These structures have anatomical and functional peculiarities that hinder the accurate study of their motility with the technology traditionally available. High-resolution manometry (HRM) has characteristics that make it more suitable for the study of the upper digestive tract. This study aims to evaluate in healthy volunteers, using HRM and transnasal pharyngoscopy, (1) the correlation between anatomical landmarks and HRM plots and (2) the normal values for manometric parameters of the pharynx, UES, and proximal esophagus.

methodsWe studied 40 asymptomatic volunteers with HRM (50 % male; median age, 27 years). Fourteen of those also underwent transnasal pharyngoscopy. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Pharyngeal peak pressure, rise time, recovery time, and duration of contraction were 128 mmHg (range, 100–164 mmHg), 197 ms (range, 169–268 ms), 385 ms (range, 285–465 ms), and 604 ms (range, 544–626 ms) at the velum and 116 mmHg (range, 97–139 mmHg), 128 ms (range, 100–156 ms), 194 ms (range, 148–219 ms), and 336 ms (range, 267–386 ms) at the epiglottis, respectively. UES extension, basal pressure, residual pressure, and duration of relaxation were 3 cm (range, 2.6–3.6 cm), 76 mmHg (range, 58–109 mmHg), 4.4 mmHg (range, 1.2–6.9 mmHg), and 678 ms (range, 636–757 ms), respectively. In the proximal esophagus, wave amplitudes at 2, 4, and 6 cm below the UES were 72 mmHg (range, 53–97 mmHg), 56 mmHg (range, 42–76 mmHg), and 48 mmHg (range, 35–59 mmHg), respectively.

conclusionsIn conclusion, normal values were established. These values may prove clinically useful and could contribute to future studies with dysphagic patients.

Indexed as

AdultDeglutitionEsophageal Sphincter, UpperEsophagusFemaleGastrointestinal MotilityHumansMaleManometryPharynxReference ValuesYoung Adult

Identifiers

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.