ArticleSaudi medical journal2020
Complications of esophageal strictures dilatation in children. A tertiary-center experience.
Article in Saudi medical journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the efficacy and safety of endoscopic and fluoroscopic balloon dilatation in benign esophageal strictures.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Treatment for Pediatric Esophageal Stenosis Induced by Chemical Burn, Congenitally, or After Surgical Repair of Esophageal Atresia.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Esophageal Diameter as a Function of Weight in Neonates, Children and Adolescents: Reference Values for Dilatation of Esophageal Stenoses.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Indications and Yield of Pediatric Endoscopy in Bahrain: A Tertiary Center Experience.International journal of pediatrics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo report the results of endoscopic dilatation of esophageal strictures in children, its complications, and their management. The outcomes of esophageal dilatation differ according to the underlying etiology.
methodsThe study included 46 patients who underwent esophageal dilatation between 2014-2019. All patients underwent a contrast study of the esophagus before endoscopic dilation to determine the location, number, and length of the narrowing. In addition, the type of dilators (balloon versus semi-rigid dilators), the number of dilatation sessions, the interval between them, and the duration of follow-up were also documented. The median age was 2.47 years, and 26 patients were females. Dysphagia was the main presenting symptom, and the leading cause of stricture was esophageal atresia.
resultsThe main treatment modality was endoscopic balloon dilatation (n=29, 63%). The esophageal diameter was significantly increased after dilation (9 [7-11] versus 12 [10-12.8]) mm; p less than 0.001). Topical mitomycin-C was used as adjuvant therapy in 3 patients (6.5%). Esophageal perforation was reported in 2 cases (4.3%). Patients needed a median of 3 dilatation sessions, 25-75th percentiles: 1-5, and the median duration between the first and last dilatation was 2.18 years 25-75th percentiles: 0.5-4.21.
conclusionEsophageal dilatation is effective for the management of children with esophageal stricture; however, repeated dilatation is frequent, especially in patients with corrosive strictures. Complications are not common, and open surgery is not frequently required.
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.