ArticleEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2022
Differences in upper esophageal sphincter function and clinical characteristics among the three subtypes of Japanese patients with esophageal achalasia.
Article in Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical characteristics and manometric findings of esophageal achalasia-a systematic review regarding differences among three subtypes.Journal of smooth muscle research = Nihon Heikatsukin Gakkai kikanshi · 2023Pooled it
- Optimizing achalasia diagnosis in the era of high-resolution manometry: A Pakistani perspective.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
- Correlation between Lower Esophageal Sphincter Metrics on High-Resolution Manometry and the Clinical Presentation of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Achalasia.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rarity of esophageal achalasia has resulted in little being known about the characteristics of its three subtypes. The upper esophageal sphincter is considered one key factor to prevent aspiration pneumonia, a serious complication of esophageal achalasia. This study aimed to reveal the subtype characteristics of esophageal achalasia and how the upper esophageal sphincter functions and relates to other clinical parameters of the disease.
methodsWe retrospectively investigated the clinical records of patients diagnosed with esophageal achalasia. All participants underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and then, within 2 weeks, high-resolution manometry. Gastrointestinal symptoms were assessed using a previously validated self-reported questionnaire.
resultsA total of 110 patients with esophageal achalasia were enrolled: 50 with type I, 40 with type II, and 20 with type III. Mean age at diagnosis was 54.5, 50.4, and 66.1 years for types I, II, and III, respectively. Mean resting upper esophageal sphincter pressure was 28.0, 51.8, and 43.6 mmHg for patients with types I, II, and III, respectively (p < 0.01). Patients with type III esophageal achalasia more frequently reported stomachache than those with type I (p = 0.03). A negative correlation between resting upper esophageal sphincter pressure and age was observed in all subtypes.
conclusionsA negative correlation was confirmed between resting upper esophageal sphincter pressure and age in all subtypes of esophageal achalasia. Type III patients were older at diagnosis, type II patients showed higher upper esophageal sphincter pressure, and type I patients showed a lower upper esophageal sphincter pressure at the early life stage.
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.