Cited by 114Gastroesophageal reflux and treatmentsGastrointestinal motility and disordersEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Measuring Esophageal Motility with a New Intraluminal Impedance Device: First Clinical Results in Reflux Patients

Fass, J., Silny, J., Braun, J., Heindrichs, U., Dreuw, B., Schumpelick, V., Rau, G.·1994·Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The study was undertaken to determine the validity of intraluminal impedance measuring for the diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders in reflux patients. METHODS: A new impedance device was used for the detection of esophageal motility patterns in a prospective study with 10 volunteers and 10 patients with reflux esophagitis grade II-III. Perfused manometry was correlated with the impedance tracings. Test meals were saline and curd in three different preparations with liquid to semisolid viscosity. RESULTS: There was a marked delay in esophageal transport with increasing viscosity of the bolus (p < 0.01). A significant (p < 0.001) delay of the bolus transport in the inflamed esophageal areas was seen in reflux patients. A reduced contractility of the lower esophagus and the lower esophageal sphincter was detected by the impedance procedure in reflux patients, indicating that the pathologic motility patterns in reflux esophagitis are most likely secondary to the tissue inflammation. CONCLUSION: We conclude that impedance procedures may give additional significant information about bolus transport and esophageal wall movements.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/00365529409092496

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Waldeck F, 1972, Leber Magen Darm, 2, 14
  2. Vantrappen G, 1989, Gastroenterol Int, 2, 150

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Fass, J., Silny, J., Braun, J., Heindrichs, U., Dreuw, B., Schumpelick, V., & Rau, G.
Affiliations
RWTH Aachen University (DE)
Venue
Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology
Published
1994-01
Volume
29
Issue
8
Pages
693-702
ISSN
  • 0036-5521 (ISSN-L)
  • 1502-7708
OpenAlex
W2020722094
Cited by
114
References
29
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
FWCI
3.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Esophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Keywords
esophageal motility, intraluminal impedance, reflux esophagitis, esophageal motility disorders, bolus transport, esophageal peristalsis, esophageal inflammation, esophageal manometry, test meal
MeSH terms
Adult, Catheterization, Electrophysiology, Esophagitis, Peptic, Esophagus, Humans, Manometry, Middle Aged, Peristalsis, Prospective Studies, Esophageal Motility Disorders, Electric Impedance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review