ReviewCurrent gastroenterology reports2016
Endoscopic Options for Gastroesophageal Reflux: Where Are We Now and What Does the Future Hold?
Review in Current gastroenterology reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The long-term efficacy of transoral incisionless fundoplication with Medigus Ultrasonic Surgical Endostapler (MUSE) for gastroesophageal reflux disease.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2023Article
- Gastroesophageal reflux disease: recent innovations in endoscopic assessment and treatment.Gastroenterology report · 2021Review
- Dysphagia in the Elderly.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early in the twenty-first century, novel endoscopic techniques were introduced for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease, providing minimally invasive ways to eliminate pharmacologic acid inhibition and avoid the need for anti-reflux surgery. These techniques do not significantly alter the anatomy of the gastroesophageal junction, minimizing short- and long-term adverse effects, such as dysphagia and bloating. After extensive clinical testing, many endoscopic therapies were abandoned due to either lack of durable efficacy or unfavorable safety profile. Today, only four such therapies remain clinically available, each with variable levels of clinical validation and market penetration. This review will provide an assessment of these endoscopic therapies, highlighting their respective strengths and weaknesses and their present and future applicability to patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27424219What 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.