Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36109362›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023

Positive and negative impact of anti-reflux mucosal intervention on gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Chu-Kuang Chou, Chien-Chuan Chen, Chieh-Chang Chen, Jia-Feng Wu, Wei-Chih Liao, Han-Mo Chiu, Hsiu-Po Wang, Ming-Shiang Wu, Ping-Huei Tseng

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05899491 (Role of ARMA in Selective Subset of Refractory GERD Patients- A Randomized Sham Control Trial.), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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.

NCT05899491 nacompletednot on this map

Role of ARMA in Selective Subset of Refractory GERD Patients- A Randomized Sham Control Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorAsian Institute of Gastroenterology, IndiaRan2023 to 2023Enrolled50ConditionsGERD, Reflux, Reflux EsophagitisArmsARMA, UGI Endoscopy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chu-Kuang Chou *Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Ditmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital, Chiayi, 60002, Taiwan.
Chien-Chuan Chen *Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, 110225, Taiwan.
Chieh-Chang ChenDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, 110225, Taiwan.
Jia-Feng WuDepartment of Pediatrics, National Taiwan University Children's Hospital, Taipei, 10041, Taiwan.
Wei-Chih LiaoDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, 110225, Taiwan.
Han-Mo ChiuDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, 110225, Taiwan.
Hsiu-Po WangDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, 110225, Taiwan.
Ming-Shiang WuDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, 110225, Taiwan.
Ping-Huei TsengDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, 110225, Taiwan. pinghuei@ntu.edu.tw.
National Taiwan University Hospital · TWChia-Yi Christian Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnti-reflux mucosal intervention (ARMI), including anti-reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) and anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA), is a promising endoscopic treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Few studies reported a detailed analysis of the objective reflux parameters.

methodsPatients with chronic PPI-dependent GERD and receiving ARMI were prospectively enrolled. Comprehensive clinical symptom profiles, endoscopy results, and 24-h multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) monitoring were collected and analyzed before and 3 months after ARMI.

resultsTwenty-three patients undergoing ARMI (11 ARMS and 12 ARMA) were enrolled. The median (IQR) operative time and post-procedure stays were 50 (46-56) min and 2 (2-2) days without major complications. 73.9% of patients reported subjective global improvement. A significant decrease in the total reflux symptom index score was noted from 12 (5-19) to 8 (4-12) (P = 0.010). The esophageal acid exposure time (AET) significantly decreased from 4.6 (2.8-6.9) to 2.1 (1.1-5.6) (P = 0.013), and the number of acid refluxes and DeMeester score were significantly reduced. Three patients (13%) had increased AET (3.4% to 6.1%, 6.3% to 15.4%, and 3.2% to 5.6%); however, all reported global improvement and two patients could discontinue PPI subjectively. One patient (4.3%) had worsened erosive esophagitis and reflux symptoms. 56.5% of patients stopped PPI.

conclusionsARMI is generally effective and safe in PPI-dependent patients. However, possible negative effects of ARMI exist in some patients; further application of MII-pH is necessitated to evaluate the treatment response after ARMI and avoid the detrimental effect of PPI discontinuation. Graph.

Indexed as

Esophagitis, PepticGastroesophageal RefluxElectric ImpedanceEsophageal pH MonitoringHumansProton Pump InhibitorsProton Pump InhibitorsAnti-reflux mucosal ablationAnti-reflux mucosal interventionAnti-reflux mucosectomyGastroesophageal reflux diseaseProton-pump inhibitor

Identifiers

PMID36109362
OpenAlexW4296034961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.