Evidence Hub

Anti-reflux mucosectomy superior to argon plasma coagulation in managing Barrett’s esophagus by improving lower esophageal sphincter pressure and cardiac sphincter valve function: a single-center, retrospective study

Tianyu Liu, Zhechuan Mei

Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology, 2025

Abstract

Background: Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a premalignant condition, caused principally by gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Anti-reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) is an effective endoscopic treatment for GERD-related BE, utilizing scar tissue in the area of the esophagogastric junction, narrowing the gastric cardia. Thus, an anti-reflux barrier is formed, which obstructs the reflux of gastric contents into the esophagus. Objectives: Therefore, in this study, we investigated whether GERD-related BE improved post-ARMS by analyzing the changes in lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, Hill’s classification for GERD, and GERD-related questionnaires. Design: In this retrospective study, we observed whether ARMS was superior to argon plasma coagulation (APC) in the management of GERD disease-related BE. Methods: Ninety-five patients were grouped into two cohorts, with 43 and 52 in the ARMS and APC cohorts, respectively. Four GERD-related questionnaires were administered. The anxiety self-rating scale (SAS) and depression self-rating scale (SDS) were used for the psychological evaluation of both cohorts. Endoscopic manifestations of BE were observed, and Hill’s classification for GERD was employed. Moreover, high-resolution esophageal manometry was performed to test esophageal motility. The follow-up period was 6 months post-treatment. Results: Greater statistically significant improvements in the four GERD-related questionnaires and SAS and SDS scores were observed post-ARMS than…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free