ReviewThe Korean journal of internal medicine2019
Achalasia: treatment, current status and future advances.
Review in The Korean journal of internal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Timed barium esophagography to predict recurrent achalasia after peroral endoscopic myotomy: a retrospective study in Thailand.Clinical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Achalasia cardia: A case report in young female.Clinical case reports · 2024Article
- A rare case of mega-esophagus due to achalasia causing tracheal compression.Radiology case reports · 2024Article
- What role does the submucosa play in the pathophysiology and treatment of achalasia? An analysis of impedance planimetry during POEM.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Botulinum Toxin A Use in the Gastrointestinal Tract: A Reappraisal After Three Decades.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2023Article
- Pathogenesis, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment progress of achalasia of cardia.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Review
- Laparoscopic Esocardiomyotomy-Risk Factors and Implications of Intraoperative Mucosal Perforation.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- An Updated Meta-analysis: Similar Clinical Efficacy of Anterior and Posterior Approaches in Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM) for Achalasia.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2022Review
- Safety and efficacy of biodegradable stents in octogenarian patients with esophageal achalasia.Endoscopy international open · 2021Article
- Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is more cost-effective than laparoscopic Heller myotomy in the short term for achalasia: economic evaluation from a randomized controlled trial.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Perception of the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with achalasia and its impact on gastrointestinal symptoms: a proof-of-concept study.Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
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
Achalasia was first described in the 17th century and its treatment continues to be challenging. Palliative treatment involves disruption of the lower esophageal sphincter, which can be accomplished mechanically (balloon dilation or surgical myotomy) or chemically (Botox). True surgical treatment originated some 100 years ago and remained largely unchanged until the advent of thoracoscopic and then laparoscopic myotomy beginning in the 1980s. Because these procedures provided relatively definitive treatment and were well tolerated by patients, minimal invasive surgery assumed a primary role in the treatment algorithms for achalasia. In 2008, an endoscopic (incision-less) myotomy approach, per-oral endoscopic myotomy, was described. This even less invasive approach has rapidly been adopted in the majority of high-volume achalasia centers. Newer interventions, such as stenting and cell transplant, are under active investigation.
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.