Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31800095›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of surgery2020

Systematic review of the introduction and evaluation of magnetic augmentation of the lower oesophageal sphincter for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

E N Kirkham, B G Main, K J B Jones, J M Blazeby, N S Blencowe

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Results of the ARROW survey of anti-reflux practice in the United Kingdom.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

E N KirkhamConformité Européenne Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Gloucester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1591-1221
B G MainBristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK.
K J B JonesBristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK.
J M BlazebyBristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3354-3330
N S BlencoweBristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1Medical Research Council MR/S001751/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMagnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is reported to be an innovative alternative to antireflux surgery for patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Although used in practice, little is known about how it has been evaluated. This study aimed to systematically summarize and appraise the reporting of MSA and its introduction into clinical practice, in the context of guidelines (such as IDEAL) for evaluating innovative surgical devices.

methodsSystematic searches were used to identify all published studies reporting MSA insertion. Data collected included patient selection, governance arrangements, surgeon expertise, technique description and outcome reporting.

resultsSearches identified 587 abstracts; 39 full-text papers were included (1 RCT 5 cohort, 3 case-control, 25 case series, 5 case reports). Twenty-one followed US Food and Drug Administration eligibility criteria for MSA insertion. Twenty-six documented that ethical approval was obtained. Two reported that participating surgeons received training in MSA; 18 provided information about how MSA insertion was performed, although techniques varied between studies. Follow-up ranged from 4 weeks to 5 years; in 14 studies, it was less than 1 year.

conclusionMost studies on MSA lacked information about patient selection, governance, expertise, techniques and outcomes, or varied between studies. Currently, MSA is being used despite a lack of robust evidence for its effectiveness.

Indexed as

MagnetsDevice RemovalEpidemiologic MethodsEsophageal Sphincter, LowerGastroesophageal RefluxHumansMagnetic Field TherapyPatient Reported Outcome Measures

Identifiers

PMID31800095
PMCPMC6972716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.