SynthesisAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2022
Heller myotomy versus Heller myotomy with fundoplication in patients with achalasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic Heller's cardiomyotomy for achalasia cardia with a long term follow up: a 16-year experience in a single institution.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Limited hiatal dissection versus Dor-fundoplication in laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia: First experience in Morocco - A case control comparison study.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHeller myotomy (HM) remains the gold standard procedure for achalasia. The addition of different types of fundoplication to HM has been debated in several studies. Given the contradictory reports, this meta-analysis was undertaken to compare different outcomes after HM and HM with fundoplication (HMF).
methodsAn electronic search was performed among five major databases (PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar) from inception to October 2019, identifying all randomised and non-randomised studies comparing HM with HMF. Two authors searched electronic databases using the keywords 'achalasia' AND 'dysphagia' AND 'gastroesophageal reflux' and all data were pooled for random-effects meta-analysis. The primary and secondary outcomes were gastroesophageal reflux and dysphagia, respectively.
resultsA total of six studies were included and involved 576 patients comparing HM and HMF. There was no statistically significant difference between gastroesophageal reflux in the HM vs HMF group (21.3% vs 22.9%, RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.60-2.88,
conclusionsThere was no statistically significant difference in long-term outcomes between a group of patients undergoing HM and a group who underwent HM with fundoplication.
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.