ReviewCurrent gastroenterology reports2025
Anti-Reflux Mucosectomy: Our Experience & Thoughts For The Future.
Review in Current gastroenterology reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Gastroesophageal reflux disease is prevalent and has a complex pathophysiology. Though medications are first line, a significant proportion of patients are refractory to this treatment and require anti-reflux surgery (ARS). Though surgery has proven safe and effective, most patients and referring providers are reluctant. Anti-Reflux Mucosectomy (ARMS) provides a less invasive alternative treatment option. This review aims to report our experience with ARMS, discuss other technical variations used, and future directions. Recent Findings In our experience, we note improvement in dysphagia with the modified butterfly-shaped mucosal resection, leading to shorter length of stay, quicker recovery, and equivalent QOL outcomes compared to ARS. We note similar efficacy and safety profiles for anti-reflux mucosal ablation, anti-reflux mucosectomy with cap-assisted mucosal resection, peroral endoscopic cardial constriction, and resection and plication. ARMS and its variations show safety and efficacy as alternative non-invasive treatment options for appropriately selected patients with refractory GERD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40643751What 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.