ArticleJournal of clinical biochemistry and nutrition2026
Effects of body position on high-resolution manometry parameters and their correlations with symptoms.
Article in Journal of clinical biochemistry and nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-resolution manometry (HRM) is essential for evaluating esophageal motility, and the Chicago Classification ver. 4.0 recommends measurements in both supine and upright positions. However, the impact of body position on HRM metrics and their relationship with symptoms has not been fully clarified. In this retrospective observational study, 287 patients undergoing HRM were categorized into postoperative, disorders of esophagogastric junction outflow (DEO), peristaltic disorders, and normal motility groups. Integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), distal contractile integral (DCI), and intrabolus pressure (IBP) were assessed in both positions, and symptom severity was evaluated using the Eckardt score, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire (GerdQ), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). IRP and DCI were significantly lower in the upright position, whereas IBP showed no positional difference. In the DEO group, IRP correlated with the Eckardt score in both positions, with a slightly stronger correlation in the supine position. Reflux and anxiety symptoms also correlated with the Eckardt score, suggesting interactions between motility impairment, reflux, and psychological factors. Although HRM metrics varied by position, neither position was clearly superior for explaining symptoms. HRM in both supine and upright positions remains essential for comprehensive clinical assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.