ArticleClinical endoscopy2017
Health-Care Utilization and Complications of Endoscopic Esophageal Dilation in a National Population.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Esophageal Perforation During Dilation in a Patient With Hypopharyngeal Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Cureus · 2026Article
- Safety of a Novel Upper Esophageal Sphincter Balloon Dilator.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Article
- Five-year single-centre experience of carcinoma of the oesophagus from Blantyre, Malawi.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2018Article
- Safe and Proper Management of Esophageal Stricture Using Endoscopic Esophageal Dilation.Clinical endoscopy · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsEsophageal stricture is usually managed with outpatient endoscopic dilation. However, patients with food impaction or failure to thrive undergo inpatient dilation. Esophageal perforation is the most feared complication, and its risk in inpatient setting is unknown.
methodsWe used National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database for 2007-2013. International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes were used to identify patients with esophageal strictures. Logistic regression was used to assess association between hospital/patient characteristics and utilization of esophageal dilation.
resultsThere were 591,187 hospitalizations involving esophageal stricture; 4.2% were malignant. Endoscopic dilation was performed in 28.7% cases. Dilation was more frequently utilized (odds ratio [OR], 1.36;
conclusionsInpatient endoscopic dilation was utilized in 29% cases of esophageal stricture. Esophageal perforation, although infrequent, is more common in malignant strictures.
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.