Observational studyWorld journal of gastroenterology2016
Autofluorescence imaging endoscopy can distinguish non-erosive reflux disease from functional heartburn: A pilot study.
Observational study in World journal of gastroenterology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoluminal Procedures and Devices for Esophageal Tract Investigation: A Critical Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Review
- Advanced Endoscopy for Benign Esophageal Disease: A Review Focused on Non-Erosive Reflux Disease and Eosinophilic Esophagitis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Recent Advances and the Potential for Clinical Use of Autofluorescence Detection of Extra-Ophthalmic Tissues.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Recent Advances in the Pharmacological Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2017Review
- Update on Functional Heartburn.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate whether autofluorescence imaging (AFI) endoscopy can distinguish non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) from functional heartburn (FH).
methodsIn this prospective observational trial, 127 patients presenting with typical reflux symptoms for > 6 mo were screened. All the participants underwent endoscopy, during which white light imaging (WLI) was followed by AFI. Finally 84 patients with normal esophageal appearance on WLI were enrolled. It was defined as being suggestive of NERD if one or more longitudinal purple lines longer than one centimeter were visualized in the distal part of the esophagus during AFI endoscopy. Ambulatory 24-h multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH monitoring was also performed. After standard proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) tests, subjects were divided into an NERD group and an FH group and the diagnostic performance of AFI endoscopy to differentiate NERD from FH was evaluated.
resultsOf 84 endoscopy-negative patients, 36 (42.9%) had a normal pH/impedance test. Of these, 26 patients with favorable responses to PPI tests were classified as having NERD. Finally 10 patients were diagnosed with FH and the others with NERD. Altogether, 68 (81.0%) of the 84 patients were positive on AFI endoscopy. In the NERD group, there were 67 (90.5%) patients with abnormal esophageal findings on AFI endoscopy while only 1 (10%) patient was positive on AFI endoscopy in the FH group. The sensitivity and specificity of AFI in differentiating NERD from FH were 90.5% (95%CI: 81.5%-96.1%) and 90.0% (95%CI: 55.5%-99.7%), respectively. Meanwhile, the accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of AFI in differentiating between NERD and FH were 90.5% (95%CI: 84.2%-96.8%), 98.5% (95%CI: 92.1%-99.9%) and 56.3% (95%CI: 30.0%-80.2%), respectively.
conclusionAutofluorescence imaging may serve as a complementary method in evaluating patients with NERD and FH.
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.