ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2019
Management of Esophageal Achalasia in Quebec.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEsophageal achalasia is a defective relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter with a loss of esophageal peristalsis causing dysphagia. Treatment can be Heller myotomy, pneumatic balloon dilation, Botox injections, peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) or medical. The main objective of the study was to measure the extent of post-treatment dysphagia depending on the type of treatment.
methodsThis was a retrospective study conducted at the Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal (CHUM) between 2011 and 2017. All patients with manometric diagnostic of achalasia in our department were included. Data were collected with the electronic health record and a standardized post-treatment telephone survey to evaluate the extent of dysphagia and the use of proton pump inhibitor (PPI).
resultsA total of 169 patients were included. The most frequent treatments were Heller myotomy (60%), Botox injection (18%) and endoscopic balloon dilation (16%). There was a significant difference in the management of patients treated at the CHUM and outside the CHUM for the frequency of pneumatic dilation (28 vs. 7%; P = 0.001) and Heller myotomy (49 vs. 69%; P = 0.02). An Eckardt score ≤ 3 was found in 80% of patients. No significant score difference was found between the CHUM and outside CHUM groups or between the different treatments. The post-treatment use of PPI was of 49% and was not significantly different depending on the site or the type of treatment.
conclusionHeller myotomy stays the most frequent treatment, especially outside our tertiary center. The rate of post-treatment dysphagia is low no matter the treatment choice. The use of PPI stays frequent regardless of the management site or the type of treatment used.
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.