W1096 The Gamma-Aminobutyric Acid (GABA) Receptor Agonist Baclofen in the Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD): A Systematic Review

Abstract Introduction Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is frequently seen in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). Long-standing GERD may cause esophagitis, long-segment strictures, and Barrett’s esophagus and may worsen pre-existing pulmonary fibrosis with an increased risk of end-stage lung disease. Surgical treatment of recalcitrant GERD remains controversial. The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize the current data on surgical treatment of recalcitrant GERD in SSc patients. Materials and methods A systematic literature review according to PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were consulted. Results A total of 101 patients were included from 7 studies. The age ranged from 34 to 61 years and the majority were females (73.5%). Commonly reported symptoms were heartburn (92%), regurgitation (77%), and dysphagia (74%). Concurrent pulmonary disease was diagnosed in 58% of patients. Overall, 63 patients (62.4%) underwent open fundoplication, 17 (16.8%) laparoscopic fundoplication, 15 (14.9%) Roux en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and 6 (5.9%) esophagectomy. The postoperative follow-up ranged from 12 to 65 months. Recurrent symptoms were described in up to 70% and 30% of patients undergoing fundoplication and RYGB, respectively. Various symptoms were reported postoperatively depending on the type of surgical procedures, anatomy of the valve, need for esophageal lengthening, and follow-up. Conclusions The treatment of recalcitrant GERD in SSc patients is challenging. Esophagectomy should be reserved to selected patients. Minimally invasive RYGB appears feasible and safe with promising preliminary short-term results. Current evidence is scarce while a definitive indication about the most appropriate surgical treatment is lacking.

Download Full-text

675 FUNDOPLICATION VERSUS ORAL PROTON PUMP INHIBITORS FOR GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS

Diseases of the Esophagus ◽

10.1093/dote/doab052.675 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

Luca Schiliró Tristão ◽

Francisco Tustumi ◽

Guilherme Tavares ◽

Letícia Nogueira Datrino ◽

Maria Carolina Andrade Serafim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease ◽

Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Proton Pump ◽

Reflux Disease ◽

Randomized Clinical Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Oral Intake

Abstract Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a widely studied and highly prevalent condition. However, few is reported about the exact efficacy and safety of fundoplication (FPT) compared to oral intake proton-pump inhibitors (PPI). This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT) aims to compare PPI and FPT in relation to the efficacy, as well as the adverse events associated with these therapies. Methods This systematic review was guided by PRISMA statement. Search carried out in June 2020 was conducted on Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE and LILACS. The inclusion criteria were (I) patients with GERD; (II) Randomized clinical trials, comparing oral intake PPI with FPT; (III) relevant outcomes for this review. The exclusion criteria were (I) reviews, case reports, editorials and letters (II) transoral or endoscopic FPT (III) studies with no full text. No restrictions were set for language or period. Certainty of evidence and risk of bias were assessed with GRADE Pro and with Review Manager Version 5.4 bias assessment tool. Results Ten RCT were included. Meta-analysis showed that heartburn (RD = −0.19; 95% CI = −0.29, −0.09) was less frequently reported by patients that underwent FPT. Furthermore, patients undergoing surgery had greater pressure on the lower esophageal sphincter than those who used PPI (MD = 7.81; 95% CI 4.79, 10.83). There was no significant difference between groups in the percentage of time with pH less than 4 in 24 hours, sustained remission and Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale. Finally, FPT did not increase significantly the risk for adverse events such as postoperative dysphagia and impaired belching. Conclusion FPT is a more effective therapy than PPI treatment for GERD, without significantly increasing the risk for adverse events. However, before indicating a possible surgical approach, it is extremely important to correctly assess and select the patients who would benefit from FPT, such as those with severe erosive esophagitis, severe respiratory symptoms, low adherence to continuous drug treatment and patients with non-acid reflux, to ensure better results.

Download Full-text

THE EFFICACY OF THE DIFFERENT ENDOSCOPIC TREATMENTS VERSUS SHAM, PHARMACOLOGIC OR SURGICAL METHODS FOR CHRONIC GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Arquivos de Gastroenterologia ◽

10.1590/s0004-2803.201800000-65 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 55 (3) ◽

pp. 296-305 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Martin Andrés CORONEL ◽

Wanderley Marques BERNARDO ◽

Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de MOURA ◽

Eduardo Turiani Hourneaux de MOURA ◽

Igor Braga RIBEIRO ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Surgical Treatment ◽

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease ◽

Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽

Reflux Disease ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Short Term ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Objective Outcomes

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Endoscopic antireflux treatments for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are still evolving, and most of the published studies address symptom relief in the short-term. Objective - We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis focused on evaluating the efficacy of the different endoscopic procedures. METHODS: Search was restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on MedLine, Cochrane, SciELO, and EMBASE for patients with chronic GERD (>6 months), over 18 years old and available follow up of at least 3 months. The main outcome was to evaluate the efficacy of the different endoscopic treatments compared to sham, pharmacological or surgical treatment. Efficacy was measured by different subjective and objective outcomes. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 16 RCT, totaling 1085 patients. The efficacy of endoscopic treatments compared to sham and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) treatment showed a significant difference up to 6 months in favor of endoscopy with no heterogeneity (P<0.00001) (I2: 0%). The subgroup analysis showed a statistically significant difference up to 6 months in favor of endoscopy: endoscopy vs PPI (P<0.00001) (I2: 39%). Endoscopy vs sham (P<0.00001) (I2: 0%). Most subjective and objective outcomes were statistically significant in favor of endoscopy up to 6 and 12 months follow up. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis shows a good short-term efficacy in favor of endoscopic procedures when comparing them to a sham and pharmacological or surgical treatment. Data on long-term follow up is lacking and this should be explored in future studies.

Download Full-text