Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30079434›Full record

ReviewCurrent gastroenterology reports2018

The Relevance of Spastic Esophageal Disorders as a Diagnostic Category.

Michelle P Clermont, Nitin K Ahuja

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current gastroenterology reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Michelle P ClermontDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Nitin K AhujaDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. nitin.ahuja@uphs.upenn.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis review addresses the similarities and differences between the spastic esophageal disorders, including jackhammer esophagus, distal esophageal spasm (DES), and type III (spastic) achalasia. The pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of each separate disorder are discussed herein, with an emphasis on overlapping and discordant features. RECENT

findingsThe Chicago Classification is a hierarchical organizational scheme for esophageal motility disorders, currently in its third iteration, with direct impact on the definitions of these three disorders. Complementary diagnostic tools such as impedance planimetry and novel manometric parameters continue to evolve. The suite of potential treatments for these disorders is also expanding, with progressive interest in the role of peroral endoscopic myotomy alongside established pharmacologic and mechanical interventions. Although jackhammer esophagus, distal esophageal spasm, and type III achalasia frequently overlap in terms of their clinical presentation and available management approaches, the divergences in their respective diagnostic criteria suggest that additional study may reveal additional mechanistic distinctions that lead in turn to further refinements in therapeutic decision-making.

Indexed as

Esophageal Motility DisordersEsophageal Spasm, DiffuseHumansAchalasiaDysmotilityEsophageal spasmHypercontractilityManometryNutcracker

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.