ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2014
Rapid air infusion into the oesophagus: Motor response in patients with achalasia and nonobstructive dysphagia assessed with high-resolution manometry.
Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of motor diagnoses by Chicago Classification versions 2.0 and 3.0 on esophageal high-resolution manometry.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2017Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAchalasia is a neurodegenerative disorder of the oesophagus. Alteration of motor activity induced by oesophageal distension has not been explored.
objectivesTo investigate this function, using high-resolution Manometry.
methodsThis study enrolled 15 healthy subjects, 15 nonobstructive dysphagia (NOD), and 18 achalasia patients successfully treated with pneumatic dilation (six with restored peristalsis). The three groups underwent five rapid (<1 s) intraoesophageal infusions of 20-ml air boluses, followed by eight 5-ml water swallows.
resultsWHEREAS THE RESPONSE RATE TO WATER SWALLOWS WAS SIMILAR IN THE THREE GROUPS, AIR INFUSION INDUCED A LOWER RESPONSE RATE IN ACHALASIA (MEDIAN, INTERQUARTILE RANGE: 70%, 40-100%) and, to a lesser extent, in NOD patients (100%, 60-100%) than in healthy subjects (100%, 100-100%; p < 0.001 and p = 0.06, respectively). However, the response rate was highly variable in achalasia patients irrespective of presence of peristalsis. Furthermore, the strength of motor response to air infusion when compared to water swallows was diminished in achalasia patients but not in healthy subjects and NOD.
conclusionsMotor response to rapid air infusion was variably impaired in achalasia. The role of this alteration in the long-term outcome deserves evaluation.
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.