Omeprazole Maintenance Therapy for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease After Failure of Fundoplication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background Recurrence of gastroesophageal reflux (GER) in children after failed fundoplication poses a therapeutic challenge. The authors report the experience with long‐term omeprazole for children with severe GER after failed fundoplication. Methods The authors reviewed the charts of all children who were treated with omeprazole for GER subsequent to failed fundoplication from 1990 to 1999. All underwent endoscopic and clinical assessment of the treatment at baseline, at 3–5 months, at 6–9 months, and annually. Results Eighteen children presented with GER, after a total of 27 fundoplications. Ten had corrected esophageal atresia, 6 had neurologica impairment, and 2 had hiatal hernia. The mean age of presentation of children with recurrence of GER was 7.8 years, and symptoms of GER occurred 4.9 years (range, 0.6–13) after last fundoplication. Fifteen patients had a mean follow‐up of 4.4 years for omeprazole. Ten patients had grade III/IV esophagitis and 5 had grade II esophagitis at presentation after fundoplication. Marked improvement was noted in symptoms of GER and severity of esophagitis while taking omeprazole. Remission of esophagitis was maintained while the patient was taking omeprazole and none had further surgery. There was no recurrence of peptic strictures in eight of nine children on omeprazole, after initial esophageal dilatations. Except for benign gastric polyps in three patients, no clinical adverse effects were observed. Conclusions Omeprazole is an effective long‐term drug for gastroesophageal reflux disease after failed fundoplication in children. Omeprazole was well‐tolerated by all children and should be tried before subsequent surgical intervention.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".