ReviewJournal of gastroenterology and hepatology2026
Pediatric Esophageal Biomechanics and Remodeling: Integrating Distensibility and Compliance Beyond Luminal Diameter.
Review in Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comment on "Pediatric Esophageal Biomechanics and Remodeling: Integrating Distensibility and Compliance Beyond Luminal Diameter".Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Response to "Comment on 'Pediatric Esophageal Biomechanics and Remodeling: Integrating Distensibility and Compliance Beyond Luminal Diameter'".Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Management of pediatric esophageal disease has traditionally relied on static anatomic endpoints including luminal diameter, endoscopic findings, and histologic features to guide diagnosis and therapeutic decision-making. However, these measures incompletely capture esophageal function and the biomechanical consequences of chronic inflammation, fibrosis, injury, and extrinsic compression. In adult gastroenterology, esophageal distensibility assessment using the functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) has emerged as an adjunctive marker of disease severity and treatment response in conditions such as achalasia and eosinophilic esophagitis. This work reviews pediatric and adult literature examining esophageal distensibility, compliance, and biomechanical remodeling, with emphasis on FLIP-based assessment, disease-specific remodeling patterns, and implications for therapeutic endoscopy. Available evidence demonstrates that esophageal distensibility provides physiologic information beyond static luminal diameter and may help explain discordance between anatomic findings and symptoms. Pediatric studies support the feasibility of FLIP-based functional assessment and suggest that altered distensibility trajectories reflect disease-related remodeling in eosinophilic esophagitis, caustic injury, postsurgical strictures, and vascular compression. Functional measurements may also help interpret dilation response and identify situations in which additional size escalation alone may yield diminishing functional benefit. This review also proposes a pediatric framework integrating FLIP-derived biomechanics into interpretation of dysphagia, dilation response, and therapeutic decision-making. Esophageal distensibility and biomechanical remodeling represent underutilized actionable concepts in pediatric esophageal disease. Integrating functional assessment with anatomic evaluation may improve interpretation of disease severity, explain discordance between symptoms and luminal diameter, and inform therapeutic decision-making. Pediatric-specific interpretive frameworks are needed to determine how distensibility and compliance metrics can guide management in children.
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.