Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40167947›Full record

SynthesisDigestive diseases and sciences2025

Comparative Analysis of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Animal Model Methods: A Data Mining of the Past Decade.

Mi Lv, Kai-Yue Huang, Xiao-Kang Wang, Yu-Xi Wang, Xi-Yun Qiao, Hui Che, Lin Lv, Feng-Yun Wang

Abstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

8 authors.

Mi LvXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No. 1 Xiyuan Playground, Haidian District, Beijing, 100091, China.
Kai-Yue HuangXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No. 1 Xiyuan Playground, Haidian District, Beijing, 100091, China.
Xiao-Kang WangXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No. 1 Xiyuan Playground, Haidian District, Beijing, 100091, China.
Yu-Xi WangBeijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beisanhuan East Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100029, China.
Xi-Yun QiaoXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No. 1 Xiyuan Playground, Haidian District, Beijing, 100091, China.
Hui CheXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No. 1 Xiyuan Playground, Haidian District, Beijing, 100091, China.
Lin LvXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No. 1 Xiyuan Playground, Haidian District, Beijing, 100091, China.
Feng-Yun WangXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No. 1 Xiyuan Playground, Haidian District, Beijing, 100091, China. 20220931911@bucm.edu.cn.

Funding

the Development and Research on the Chinese Herbal Medicine Compound SQQT for the Treatment of Chronic Atrophic Gastritis XYZX0303 - 07the National Natural Science Foundation of China 82205104the Science and Technology Innovation Project of the China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences CI2021A01001the Special Program for Outstanding Young Scientific and Technological Talents of the China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences ZZ16 - YQ - 002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe differences in the animal model construction of different subtypes of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) have not been clearly demonstrated at present. We aim to reveal the characteristics and differences between them.

methodsThe literature related to GERD animal model construction in the past decade was searched and data on animal strains, modeling modes, modeling cycles, and detection indices were extracted, and the results were presented by using descriptive statistical methods of frequency and relative frequency.

results88 papers finally met the criteria. Sprague-Dawley (68.25%) rats were most often used to induce reflux esophagitis (RE), whereas Swiss mice (50.00%) and C57BL/6 mice (57.89%) for non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) and Barrett's esophagus (BE), respectively. RE and NERD were most frequently constructed using fore-stomach-glandular transition ligation together with pyloric insufficiency (37.68%, 50.00%), yet their median modeling cycles were 14 and 7 days, respectively. BE was most frequently constructed using L2-IL-1β transgenic mice (27.27%), and the median modeling cycle over 270 days. Determining esophageal mucosal permeability was common in NERD, while finding intestinal chemotaxis markers, squamous epithelium, and columnar epithelium was common in BE. In animal models of RE, researchers tended to look for markers associated with the inflammatory response and oxidative stress.

conclusionsThe induction methods vary among the animal models of GERD's three subtypes. Inflammatory stimulation is crucial for inducing RE and BE, differing in modeling cycle. In contrast, Visceral hypersensitivity draws more attention in NERD animal models, reflecting researchers' thoughts on distinct pathogenesis.

Indexed as

Data MiningDisease Models, AnimalGastroesophageal RefluxAnimalsEsophagitis, PepticMiceRatsAnimal modelBarrett’s esophagusData miningNon-erosive reflux diseaseReflux esophagitis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.