ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2013
Achalasia--balloon dilation or surgery?
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic Heller's myotomy versus pneumatic dilatation for achalasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2024Pooled it
- Pneumatic balloon dilatation versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia: a failed attempt at meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Pooled it
- Heller myotomy versus endoscopic balloon dilatation for achalasia: A single center experience.Medicine · 2019Article
- Pseudoachalasia: Still a Tough Clinical Challenge.The American journal of case reports · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal therapeutic schedule in patients with achalasia is still under discussion. The aim of this study was to review our institution's experience with myotomy and dilation in patients with achalasia. MATERIAL AND
methodsClinical data were available for 59 patients who had ever had myotomy (n=38), dilation (n=21), or both procedures (n=8) between 2000 and 2007. Patients were followed prospectively with objective (a barium esophagogram) and subjective (a simple survey that scored dysphagia and overall patient satisfaction with the procedure) diagnostic tools. In the group of patients after pneumatic dilatations, frequency of interventions was higher (1, 2) than in the myotomy group (0, 2) at 2-year follow-up. Patients after myotomy with recurrence of dysphagia were treated with dilations.
resultsMean time of dysphagia occurrence was similar in both groups (10 months). The statistically significant differences in treatment outcomes in both groups were in favor of myotomy during 2-year follow-up.
conclusionsThe data indicates that both methods of treatment might be useful in dysphagia control, but better results are obtained after myotomy. Repeat interventions are more frequent after endoscopic dilation. One method of treatment does not exclude the other. A short period of symptom relief after myotomy may suggest the myotomy was incomplete.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.