Jackhammer esophagus: A meta‐analysis of patient demographics, disease presentation, high‐resolution manometry data, and treatment outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Jackhammer esophagus (JE) is a newly described esophageal motility disorder. However, there are limited data on JE and this entity remains misunderstood. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of clinical series on JE through MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Data from included studies were then extracted, and random-effects meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of JE was 1.97% [95% CI: 1.39%-2.78%] among patients referred for high-resolution manometry (HRM). The mean age at diagnosis was 60.8 years [95% CI: 57.1-64.4] and 65% [95% CI: 58%-72%] of patients were female. JE was significantly more prevalent in postlung transplant patients and morbidly obese patients undergoing HRM (23.99% [95% CI: 9.00%-38.97%] and 5.18% [95% CI: 1.76%-14.3%] respectively). Dysphagia was the most common presentation of JE (64% [95% CI: 52%-77%]) followed by gastroesophageal reflux disease (46% [95% CI: 26%-67%]). The pooled mean distal contractile integral (DCI) of all standard HRM swallows was 9249 mm Hg·s·cm [95% CI: 7834-10 663], and the pooled mean integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) was 13.9 mm Hg [95% CI: 8.2-19.7]. Overall, 73.6% [95% CI: 64.0%-83.1%] of JE patients who underwent treatment achieved clinical symptom improvement (79% [95% CI: 74%-85%] for endoscopic treatment and 63% [95% CI: 47%-79%] for medical treatment). The pooled clinical success rate of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) specifically was 82% [95% CI: 75%-90%]. CONCLUSIONS: JE is a new motility disorder most commonly presenting with dysphagia. High clinical suspicion is important because the diagnosis can only be made through HRM.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".