ArticleDiseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus2025
Clinical yield of esophagogastroduodenoscopy and pH-impedance testing in esophageal atresia patients performed according to international guidelines.
Article in Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
According to the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology And Nutrition & North American Society For Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology And Nutrition (ESPGHAN-NASPGHAN) guideline, esophageal atresia (EA) patients should routinely undergo esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with biopsies and/or pH-impedance (pH multichannel intraluminal impedance test; pH-MII) for surveillance purposes. It is additionally recommended to perform these procedures when there is a clinical indication: symptoms suggestive of gastroesophageal reflux disease or eosinophilic esophagitis. The aim of this study was to evaluate how often EGD/pH-MII outcomes change management decisions in EA children who come for surveillance and/or for clinical evaluation of their symptoms. A retrospective chart review was conducted of all EA patients who received EGD and/or pH-MII for routine surveillance or because of clinical indication, i.e. symptoms suggestive of gastroesophageal reflux disease or eosinophilic esophagitis. For each procedure, we assessed whether outcomes changed management decisions. Between 2017 and 2020, 41 patients (median age 2.0 [1.0-17.5] years) underwent EGD/pH-MII for surveillance purposes and 64 (3.0 [0.1-15.8] years) for symptom evaluation. Of the 41 patients who underwent surveillance EGD/pH-MII, 18 (43.9%) were asymptomatic when interviewed. Eight of these 18 (44.4%) had results that changed management decisions. In total, 23/41 (56.1%) had results that changed management decisions. Sixty-four patients presented clinically with (a combination of) dysphagia (n = 50; 78.1%), regurgitation (n = 37; 57.8%), heartburn (n = 18; 28.1%), and/or respiratory symptoms that were thought to have a gastrointestinal origin (n = 24; 37.5%). Results changed management decisions in 34/64 (53.1%) patients who presented with symptoms. There is a high clinical yield of EGD and pH-MII testing in EA patients. More than half of the patients, regardless of indication (routine surveillance or symptom evaluation), had EGD and/or pH-MII results that changed management decisions. WHAT IS KNOWN: WHAT IS NEW:
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.