Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33772739›Full record

ArticleAdvances in therapy2021

Changes in the Treatment of Primary Esophageal Motility Disorders Imposed by the New Classification for Esophageal Motility Disorders on High Resolution Manometry (Chicago Classification 4.0).

Fernando A M Herbella, Leonardo M Del Grande, Francisco Schlottmann, Marco G Patti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Fernando A M HerbellaDepartment of Surgery, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Rua Diogo de Faria 1087 cj 301, Sao Paulo, SP, 04037-003, Brazil. herbella.dcir@epm.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3594-5744
Leonardo M Del GrandeDepartment of Surgery, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Rua Diogo de Faria 1087 cj 301, Sao Paulo, SP, 04037-003, Brazil.
Francisco SchlottmannDepartment of Surgery, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Rua Diogo de Faria 1087 cj 301, Sao Paulo, SP, 04037-003, Brazil.
Marco G PattiDepartment of Surgery, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Rua Diogo de Faria 1087 cj 301, Sao Paulo, SP, 04037-003, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Chicago Classification is the most used classification for primary esophageal motility disorders (PEMD). This classification was recently updated to the 4.0 version. This opinion piece focuses on the possible implications for the treatment of PMED determined by the new classification. Chicago Classification 4.0 included two new concepts for the diagnosis of achalasia: (1) type III achalasia diagnosis demands 100% absent peristalsis defined as either failed peristalsis or spasm; (2) "inconclusive diagnosis of achalasia" was added as a possibility. Both may decrease unnecessary treatment. Esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction, distal esophageal spasm, and hypercontractile esophagus were only considered clinically significant when correlated to supportive testing and relevant clinical symptoms and in the absence of gastroesophageal reflux disease. This may decrease the surge of treatment, especially peroral endoscopic myotomy, based solely on manometric diagnosis.

Indexed as

Esophageal AchalasiaEsophageal Motility DisordersHumansManometryPeristalsisAchalasiaChicago classificationEsophageal manometryEsophageal motility disordersHigh-resolution manometryPeroral endoscopic myotomy

Identifiers

PMID33772739
PMCPMC8107150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.