ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Changes in impedance planimetry (EndoFLIP) measurements at follow-up after peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM).
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05807763 (Selective Use of Fundoplication in Laparoscopic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair Based on Intra-operative Impedance Planimetry), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Selective Use of Fundoplication in Laparoscopic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair Based on Intra-operative Impedance Planimetry (FLIP)
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and outcomes of per oral plication of the (neo)esophagus (POPE) for impaired emptying in achalasia and post-esophagectomy patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Esophageal impedance planimetry during per-oral endoscopic myotomy guides myotomy extent.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Intraoperative distensibility measurement in POEM for achalasia: impact on patient outcome and associations with other outcome variables at 1-year follow-up.Surgical endoscopy · 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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNumerous studies show changes in functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) measurements after myotomy during peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), but few report on FLIP measurements at follow-up esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). The purpose of this study was to compare perioperative FLIP measurements to those at follow-up EGD.
methodsPatients who underwent POEM with FLIP in the operating room and POEM patients who had EGD with FLIP at follow-up were included. FLIP measurements, including diameter (Dmin), pressure, cross-sectional area (CSA), and distensibility index (DI), were analyzed at a 30-mL balloon fill. Differences between measurements at different timepoints were assessed using a two-tailed Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
resultsA total of 97 patients who underwent POEM and 28 who underwent EGD with FLIP were analyzed. The average age was 63 ± 18 years and 46.4% of the patients were male. Mean preoperative Eckardt score was 6.5 ± 4.8, decreasing to 1.6 ± 2.0 at follow-up. EGDs were performed at a median of 15 months after surgery. When compared to mean measurements obtained post-myotomy, at the time of EGD, pressure was found to be significantly lower (p = 0.007) and DI significantly higher (p = 0.045). Of the patients who underwent EGD, 70.8% had an increase in DI, 55.6% had evidence of reflux esophagitis, and 81.0% met diagnostic criteria for reflux on esophageal pH monitoring. However, there was no correlation with the development of esophagitis or reflux and increase or decrease in DI at follow-up.
conclusionsThere are significant changes in FLIP measurements between the time of surgery and at follow-up EGD. These results suggest that esophageal remodeling may cause changes in lower esophageal sphincter geometry after POEM and postoperative FLIP targets immediately post-myotomy may need to be adjusted to account for these changes.
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.