ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
A comparative analysis of ARMS (anti-reflux mucosectomy) and TIF (transoral incisionless fundoplication) in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).
Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 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.
- Targeted Endoscopic Therapies for Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD): A Narrative Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a prevalent condition impacting physical and mental health, characterized by symptoms like heartburn and acid regurgitation. GERD affects 18.1-27.8% of North Americans, rising to ~ 50% under less strict criteria. Effective management of GERD is critical to improving patients' quality of life. Traditional treatments range from lifestyle modifications and pharmacological interventions to surgical approaches like laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery (LARS). Patients with erosive esophagitis receive a near 70-80% rate of "complete" symptom relief by 4 weeks using PPIs, in contrast to patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), who demonstrate an intermediate response on the order of 50-60%. However, the invasiveness and associated side effects of surgical options have spurred the development of endoscopic techniques, including anti-reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) and transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF). This review evaluates ARMS and TIF as therapeutic interventions for GERD, focusing on their risks, benefits, outcomes, and complications. ARMS is noted for shorter procedure times and fewer complications, particularly dysphagia and bleeding, making it an efficient choice for symptom control. TIF, while associated with a higher recurrence and reoperation rate, demonstrates superior long-term efficacy in medication reduction and sustained quality-of-life improvements, especially in patients without prior anti-reflux surgeries. Emerging advancements in endoscopic technologies, such as improved suturing techniques and refinements in mucosal resection, hold promise for reducing recurrence rates and enhancing procedural durability. The choice between ARMS and TIF should be tailored to individual patient needs, taking into account GERD severity, comorbidities, and surgical history. Both procedures exemplify significant advancements in minimally invasive GERD management, and ongoing innovations in endoscopic technologies are expected to further refine their safety and effectiveness. This comparative analysis provides insights into optimizing treatment selection and underscores the importance of personalized care in managing GERD.
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.