scholarly journals Efficacy of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation versus Nissen Fundoplication for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Short Term: A Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming-yu Chen ◽  
Di-yu Huang ◽  
Angela Wu ◽  
Yi-bin Zhu ◽  
He-pan Zhu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease ◽  
Proton Pump Inhibitor ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Reflux Disease ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation ◽  
Short Term

Background. The efficacy of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation (MSA) and its outcomes for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) are uncertain. Therefore, we aimed to summarize and analyze the efficacy of two treatments for GERD.Methods. The meta-analysis search was performed, using four databases. All studies from 2005 to 2016 were included. Pooled effect was calculated using either the fixed or random effects model.Results. A total of 4 trials included 624 patients and aimed to evaluate the differences in proton-pump inhibitor use, complications, and adverse events. MSA had a shorter operative time (MSA and NF: RR = −18.80, 95% CI: −24.57 to −13.04, andP=0.001) and length of stay (RR = −14.21, 95% CI: −24.18 to −4.23, andP=0.005). Similar proton-pump inhibitor use, complication (P=0.19), and severe dysphagia for dilation were shown in both groups. Although there is no difference between the MSA and NF in the number of adverse events, the incidence of postoperative gas or bloating (RR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54–0.94, andP=0.02) showed significantly different results. However, there is no significant difference in ability to belch and ability to vomit.Conclusions. MSA can be recommended as an alternative treatment for GERD according to their short-term studies, especially in main-features of gas-bloating, due to shorter operative time and less complication of gas or bloating.

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

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.

scholarly journals Additional Mosapride to Proton Pump Inhibitor for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 2705
Author(s):  
Toshihiro Nishizawa ◽  
Kiyoto Mori ◽  
Shuntaro Yoshida ◽  
Hirotoshi Ebinuma ◽  
Osamu Toyoshima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease ◽  
Proton Pump Inhibitor ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽  
Symptom Score ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Reflux Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Difference ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity

Background and Aim: In gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), the additive effect of mosapride to a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is still controversial. This meta-analysis integrated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which mosapride combined with a PPI was compared with a PPI alone in GERD treatment. Methods: RCTs were systematically searched with the PubMed, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and the Igaku-Chuo-Zasshi database. We combined the data from the RCTs with a random effects model, calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) and pooled the risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: We included nine RCTs in the present meta-analysis. In the mosapride combined with PPI group, the improvement of the symptom score was significantly greater than that in the PPI alone group without significant heterogeneity (SMD: −0.28, 95% CI: −0.45 to −0.12, p = 0.0007). In the mosapride combined with PPI group, the symptom score after treatment was significantly lower than that in the PPI alone group (SMD: −0.24, 95% CI: −0.42 to −0.06, p = 0.007). Conclusions: Mosapride combined with a PPI significantly improved the reflux symptom score compared with that of PPI alone.

Potential reasons for proton pump inhibitor failure in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease

2008 ◽  
Vol 149 (40) ◽  
pp. 1881-1888 ◽  
Author(s):  
Márk Juhász ◽  
Zsolt Tulassay
Keyword(s):  
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease ◽  
Proton Pump Inhibitor ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Reflux Disease

A protonpumpagátlók (protonpumpa-inhibitorok, PPI) bevezetése új fejezetet nyitott a gastrooesophagealis refluxbetegség (gastroesophageal reflux disease, GERD) kezelésében. A betegek kisebb, de nem jelentéktelen hányadában azonban a PPI sem hatékony. Ilyen esetekben az első kérdés mindig az, hogy a tünetek valóban GERD-nek tulajdoníthatók-e, vagy egyéb betegség után kell kutatnunk. Ha a GERD a legvalószínűbb lehetőség, akkor a további vizsgálatok és a több támadáspontú kezelés előtt fel kell térképeznünk a beteg együttműködését (compliance). Ha az eredménytelen PPI-kezelés hátterében nem helytelenül kezelt GERD áll, akkor számos egyéb kórkép lehetőségét is fel kell vetnünk. Összefoglaló közleményünkben az elkülönítő diagnosztikai kérdésekről adunk áttekintést.

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

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 296-305 ◽  
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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document