Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35762702›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in gastroenterology2022

Recent insights on functional heartburn and reflux hypersensitivity.

Edoardo Savarino, Elisa Marabotto, Vincenzo Savarino

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in gastroenterology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Edoardo SavarinoGastroenterology Unit, Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padua, Padua.
Elisa MarabottoGastroenterology Unit, Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Vincenzo SavarinoGastroenterology Unit, Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
University of Genoa · ITUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewRome IV experts have proposed that gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) should be diagnosed only in patients with abnormal esophageal acid exposure, and that reflux hypersensitivity (RH) and functional heartburn (FH) both should be considered functional conditions separate from GERD. Although past and recent evidence support that FH can be completely distinguished from GERD, the concept that RH is not GERD is highly questionable. This review attempts to provide current data on these issues. RECENT

findingsMany recent investigations have provided new data on the different pathophysiological features characterizing RH and FH. Major differences have emerged from analyses of impedance-pH monitoring studies using the novel impedance metrics of baseline impedance (an index of mucosal integrity) and the rate of postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic waves (a reflection of the integrity of esophageal chemical clearance). SUMMARY: The better ability to interpret impedance-pH tracings together with earlier data on the different prevalence of microscopic esophagitis in RH and FH patients, and recent studies documenting poor therapeutic efficacy of pain modulators and good results of antireflux surgery for RH support recategorization of RH within the GERD world. Further research is needed to correctly phenotype patients who have heartburn without mucosal breaks, and to guide their effective management.

Indexed as

Esophageal DiseasesGastroesophageal RefluxEsophageal pH MonitoringHeartburnHumans

Identifiers

PMID35762702
PMCPMC10810351
OpenAlexW4283657899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.