ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Unlocking the secrets of esophageal motility: how ineffective motility influences dysphagia and LES function following robotic hiatal hernia repair.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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.
- Postoperative quality of life after minimally invasive repair of giant hiatal hernias.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
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
backgroundIneffective Esophageal Motility (IEM) is often identified during preoperative evaluations for anti-reflux surgery (ARS). Concerns regarding postoperative dysphagia may lead to hesitancy in offering surgery to these patients. This study compares postoperative dysphagia rates and lower esophageal sphincter (LES) function in patients with IEM versus those with normal esophageal peristalsis (NIEM).
methodsWe conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent high-resolution manometry and robotic ARS between March 2011 and January 2024. Patients were classified as NIEM or IEM based on manometry, with IEM sub-stratified into non-severe (NSIEM: ≥ 50% to < 70% ineffective swallows) and severe (SIEM: ≥ 70% ineffective swallows). Postoperative dysphagia rates were assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months. LES function was evaluated using endoscopic impedance planimetry (Endo FLIP). Patients requiring reoperation were excluded.
resultsA total of 633 patients met inclusion criteria: IEM (n = 97) and NIEM (n = 536). IEM patients were more likely to be male (p < 0.001) and less likely to be Hispanic (p < 0.001). Dysphagia rates did not differ significantly between groups at any time point. Subgroup analysis of NIEM, NSIEM, and SIEM revealed a significant difference in mild dysphagia at 12 months (p = 0.041), associated with preoperative dysphagia. However, the incidence of new-onset dysphagia at 12 months was not impacted by IEM. Preoperatively, IEM patients had larger LES cross-sectional areas (93.46 ± 43.32 vs. 76.7 ± 41.36 mm
conclusionPatients with IEM had positive outcomes after ARS, with no significant differences in overall dysphagia rates compared to NIEM. Although mild long-term dysphagia was more common in IEM patients, it appears that these symptoms persist from before the surgery, suggesting that these patients tend to have similar long-term outcomes to patients without IEM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40813908What 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.