Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42878816›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026

Gastric peroral endoscopic pyloromyotomy for delayed gastric conduit emptying: outcomes and predictors of treatment response.

L S Boer, C A C 't Hoen, I N Beaufort, B A J Bastiaansen, P Fockens, L Noteboom, C M G Saleh, S S Gisbertz, B L A M Weusten

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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

9 authors.

L S BoerDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, the Netherlands. l.s.boer-17@umcutrecht.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-0213-2140
C A C 't HoenDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
I N BeaufortDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
B A J BastiaansenDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology and Metabolism, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
P FockensDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology and Metabolism, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
L NoteboomDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
C M G SalehDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
S S GisbertzDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
B L A M WeustenDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDelayed gastric conduit emptying (DGCE) is common in patients following esophagectomy, and its treatment remains challenging. This study evaluated efficacy and safety of gastric peroral endoscopic pyloromyotomy (GPOEM) and predictors of treatment response.

methodsWe prospectively included patients with symptoms of DGCE following esophagectomy scheduled for GPOEM in two tertiary referral centers. EndoFLIP measurements were conducted before and 3 months after GPOEM. Gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES) was performed prior to, 3 and 12 months after GPOEM. Efficacy was evaluated by clinical success, defined as a score of 1 or 2 on a six-point Likert scale 3 months after GPOEM. Predictive factors for clinical success, including pyloric distensibility, GES and response to prior pylorus-directed therapy (botulinum injection and pyloric dilatation), were evaluated by exploratory analyses.

resultsThe technical success rate of GPOEM was 95% (19/20; 95% CI 75-100). At 3-, and 12-months post-procedure, the clinical success rates were 68% (13/19; 95% CI 37-84) and 44% (8/18; 95% CI 22-67). Distensibility prior to GPOEM did not differ significantly between patients with and without clinical success (3.7 vs. 4.0 mm

conclusionGPOEM is feasible and safe in patients with DGCE following esophagectomy, demonstrating initial efficacy in two-thirds of patients, although this declined to less than half at 1-year follow-up. In exploratory analyses, no predictors of treatment response were identified. Larger studies are needed to investigate if response to pylorus-directed therapy may predict an increased likelihood of treatment response.

Indexed as

Delayed gastric conduit emptyingEndoFLIPEsophagectomyGastric peroral endoscopic pyloromyotomyPylorus-directed therapy

Identifiers

PMID42878816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.