Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40587131›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Reflux Recurrence After Laparoscopic Fundoplication for Nonerosive Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Dag Holmberg, Julia Bielik, Giola Santoni, Eivind Ness-Jensen, My von Euler-Chelpin, Joonas H Kauppila, Jesper Lagergren

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Dag HolmbergDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Julia BielikDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Giola SantoniDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Eivind Ness-JensenDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
My von Euler-ChelpinDepartment of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Joonas H KauppilaDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jesper LagergrenDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is very common in high-income countries. Nonerosive GERD is increasingly being considered a different entity from erosive GERD, with a more benign disease course but less responsiveness to antireflux medication. Whether nonerosive GERD responds less well than erosive GERD to antireflux surgery is unclear. Objective: To assess whether patients with nonerosive GERD retain more reflux symptoms after antireflux surgery than patients with erosive GERD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study included all patients in Finland and Sweden who underwent primary laparoscopic fundoplication for GERD between January 1, 1996, and December 31, 2019. Statistical analysis was conducted from March to April 2024. Exposure: Patients with nonerosive GERD (ie, no erosive esophagitis or Barrett esophagus detected during preoperative endoscopy) were compared with patients with erosive GERD (ie, erosive esophagitis detected during preoperative endoscopy). Main Outcome and Measures: The main outcome was reflux recurrence, defined as 6 months or more of postoperative antireflux medication or secondary antireflux surgery. Poisson regression provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs, adjusted for sex, age, comorbidity, hospital volume of antireflux surgery, calendar year, and country. Results: Of 6194 patients (median age, 53 years [IQR, 42-62 years]; 3310 women [53.4%]) who underwent primary fundoplication, 2700 (43.6%) received a diagnosis of nonerosive GERD, and 3494 (56.4%) received a diagnosis of erosive GERD. During up to 23 years of follow-up (range, 0-23 years; median, 8.8 person-years [IQR, 4.3-13.5 person-years]), the frequency of reflux recurrence was similar among patients with nonerosive GERD (17.1% [461 of 2700]) and those with erosive GERD (17.1% [596 of 3494]). Patients with nonerosive GERD had a similar overall risk of reflux recurrence as patients with erosive GERD (adjusted HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.87-1.11) and a similar risk of reflux recurrence when studying recurrence by antireflux medication (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90-1.21) and secondary antireflux surgery (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.75-1.10) separately. There were no differences in HRs between various follow-up categories after fundoplication or in analyses stratified by the 6 variables included in the multivariable model. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study of patients who underwent primary laparoscopic fundoplication suggests that the risk of reflux recurrence was similar among patients with nonerosive GERD and those with erosive GERD. This finding is in contrast with evidence showing that nonerosive GERD responds less well to antireflux medication. Thus, the absence of erosive GERD detected by an upper endoscopy may not be used as an argument for abstaining from antireflux surgery.

Indexed as

FundoplicationGastroesophageal RefluxLaparoscopyAdultAgedCohort StudiesFemaleFinlandHumansMaleMiddle AgedRecurrenceSweden

Identifiers

PMID40587131
PMCPMC12210078

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.