ReviewTherapeutic advances in chronic disease2021
Advances and caveats in modern achalasia management.
Review in Therapeutic advances in chronic disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prophylactic antibiotics after peroral endoscopic myotomy may not significantly reduce postprocedural fever or infection: a propensity score matching analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Response Rate to Treatment of Achalasia Patients With Thyroid Disorders Versus Euthyroid Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study in Iran.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
- Modern Achalasia: Diagnosis, Classification, and Treatment.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2023Review
- Symptom duration is not associated with per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) failure.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Diagnostics of Gastrointestinal Motility and Function: Update for Clinicians.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Advances on Neurogastroenterology and Motility Disorders: Pathophysiology, Diagnostics and Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Achalasia is a rare esophageal motility disorder characterized by the incomplete relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and impaired peristaltic activity. The advent of high-resolution manometry (HRM) and the rapidly evolving role of therapeutic endoscopy have revolutionized the approach to the diagnosis and management of achalasia patients in the last decade. With advances in HRM technology and methodology, fluoroscopy and EndoFlip, achalasia can be differentiated into therapeutically meaningful phenotypes with a high degree of accuracy. Further, the newest treatment option, per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), has become a staple therapy following the last 10 years of experience, and recent randomized trials appear to show no difference between POEM, graded pneumatic dilatation and surgical Heller myotomy in terms of short- and long-term efficacy or complication rate. On the other hand, how treatment outcomes are measured as well as the risk of reflux following therapy remain areas of contention. This review aims to summarize the recent advancements in achalasia testing and therapy, describes the recent randomized clinical trials as well as their potential setbacks, and touches on the future of personalizing achalasia treatment.
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.