scholarly journals Implant Removal Versus Implant Retention Following Posterior Surgical Stabilization of Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110054
Author(s):  
Barry Ting Sheen Kweh ◽  
Terence Tan ◽  
Hui Qing Lee ◽  
Martin Hunn ◽  
Susan Liew ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Implant Removal ◽  
Correction Loss ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Retention Group ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Implant Retention ◽  
Removal Group

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: To compare biomechanical and functional outcomes between implant removal and implant retention following posterior surgical fixation of thoracolumbar burst fractures. Methods: A search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Cochrane Databases was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: Of the 751 articles initially retrieved, 13 published articles pooling 673 patients were included. Meta-analysis revealed there was a statistically significant improvement in sagittal Cobb Angle by 16.48 degrees (9.13-23.83, p < 0.01) after surgical stabilization of thoracolumbar burst fractures. This correction decremented to 9.68 degrees (2.02-17.35, p < 0.01) but remained significant at the time of implant removal approximately 12 months later. At final follow-up, the implant removal group demonstrated a 10.13 degree loss (3.00-23.26, p = 0.13) of reduction, while the implant retention group experienced a 10.17 degree loss (1.79-22.12, p = 0.10). There was no statistically significant difference in correction loss between implant retention and removal cohorts (p = 0.97). Pooled VAS scores improved by a mean of 3.32 points (0.18 to 6.45, p = 0.04) in the combined removal group, but by only 2.50 points (-1.81 to 6.81, p = 0.26) in the retention group. Oswestry Disability Index scores also improved after implant removal by 7.80 points (2.95-12.64, p < 0.01) at 1 year and 11.10 points (5.24-16.96, p < 0.01) at final follow-up. Conclusions: In younger patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures who undergo posterior surgical stabilization, planned implant removal results in superior functional outcomes without significant difference in kyphotic angle correction loss compared to implant retention.

scholarly journals THORACOLUMBAR BURST FRACTURES, SHORT X LONG FIXATION: A META-ANALYSIS

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Alberto Assunção Filho ◽  
Filipe Cedro Simões ◽  
Gabriel Oliveira Prado
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Postoperative Period ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Kyphosis Correction ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Significant Difference

ABSTRACT The number of fixed segments in the surgical treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures remains controversial. This study aims to compare the results of short and long fixation in thoracolumbar burst fractures through a meta-analysis of studies published recently. MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were used. Randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative studies (prospective and retrospective) were selected. Data were analyzed with the software Review Manager. There was no statistically significant difference in the Cobb angle of preoperative kyphosis. Long fixation showed lower average measurements postoperatively (MD = 1.41; CI = 0.73-2.08; p<0.0001) and in the last follow-up (MD = 3.98; CI = 3.22-4.75; p<0.00001). The short fixation showed the highest failure rates (RD = 4.03; CI = 1.33-12.16; p=0.01) and increased loss of height of the vertebral body (MD = 1.24; CI = 0.49-1.98; p=0.001), with shorter operative time (MD = -24.54; CI = -30.16 - -18.91; p<0.00001). There was no significant difference in blood loss and clinical outcomes. The high rates of kyphosis correction loss with short fixation and the lower correction rate in the immediate postoperative period were validated. There was no significant difference in the blood loss rates because arthrodesis was performed in a short segment in the analyzed studies. The short fixation was performed in a shorter operative time, as expected. No study has shown superior clinical outcomes. The short fixation had worse rates of kyphosis correction in the immediate postoperative period, and increased loss of correction in long-term follow-up, making the long fixation an effective option in the management of this type of fracture.

scholarly journals Short Segment versus Long Segment Pedicle Screws Fixation in Management of Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 150-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tarek Ahmed Aly
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pedicle Screw Fixation ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Significant Difference

<p>Posterior pedicle screw fixation has become a popular method for treating thoracolumbar burst fractures. However, it remains unclear whether additional fixation of more segments could improve clinical and radiological outcomes. This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of fixation levels with pedicle screw fixation for thoracolumbar burst fractures. MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Springer, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant randomized and quasirandomized controlled trials that compared the clinical and radiological efficacy of short versus long segment for thoracolumbar burst fractures managed by posterior pedicle screw fixation. Risk of bias in included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Based on predefined inclusion criteria, Nine eligible trials with a total of 365 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Results were expressed as risk difference for dichotomous outcomes and standard mean difference for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence interval. Baseline characteristics were similar between the short and long segment fixation groups. No significant difference was identified between the two groups regarding radiological outcome, functional outcome, neurologic improvement, and implant failure rate. The results of this meta-analysis suggested that extension of fixation was not necessary when thoracolumbar burst fracture was treated by posterior pedicle screw fixation. More randomized controlled trials with high quality are still needed in the future.</p>

scholarly journals Efficacy and Radiographic Analysis of Posterior Mono Axial Pedicle Screw Fixation in Treating Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sang-Soo Lee ◽  
Jae-Hoon Shim ◽  
Eun-Min Seo
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Pedicle Screw Fixation ◽  
Correction Loss ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Correction Rate ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Sagittal Index

Abstract Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of posterior mono axial pedicle screws fixation in the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures.Methods: In the present study we analyzed 50 patients retrospectively who had thoracolumbar burst fractures without a neurological deficit. Patients were divided into 2 groups: mono axial pedicle Screw fixation group (n = 25) and poly axial pedicle Screw fixation group (n = 25). We collected clinical data (visual analog scale score for back pain) and included radiographic measurements. The latter were used to calculate the sagittal plane kyphosis.Results: For the mono group, the preoperative mean sagittal index (SI) was O.59 ± 0.12 (range, 0.37–0.77), and the last follow up sagittal index (SI)was O.76 ± 0.09 (range, 0.56–0.89). For the poly group, the preoperative sagittal index (SI) was O.57 ± 0.11 (range, 0.34–0.82),and the last follow up sagittal index (SI) was O.65 ± 0.11 (range, 0.36–0.87). For the mono group, the mean postoperative regional kyphosis correction rate was 62.31%, and correction loss was 14.18% in late follow-up. For the poly group, the mean postoperative regional kyphosis correction rate was 52.17%, and correction loss was 33.42% in late follow-up. The mono axial pedicle screw group had good correction rate, and reduce the risks of correction loss. The mean visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back pain improved by 2.4/2.5 and 3.8/4.2 for the mono and poly groups. There was no significant difference between groups.Conclusions: The mono axial pedicle screw fixation was better for reducing and maintaining anterior vertebral height and regional kyphosis. Therefore, the mono axial pedicle screw is a better optional instrumentation to treat thoracolumbar vertebral fractures.

Comparison of thoracolumbosacral orthosis and no orthosis for the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures: interim analysis of a multicenter randomized clinical equivalence trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher S. Bailey ◽  
Marcel F. Dvorak ◽  
Kenneth C. Thomas ◽  
Michael C. Boyd ◽  
Scott Paquett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Skeletal Maturity ◽  
Burst Fracture ◽  
Equivalence Trial ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Significant Difference

Object The authors compared the outcome of patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures treated with and without a thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO). Methods As of June 2002, all consecutive patients satisfying the following inclusion criteria were considered eligible for this study: 1) the presence of an AO Classification Type A3 burst fractures between T-11 and L-3, 2) skeletal maturity and age < 60 years, 3) admission within 72 hours of injury, 4) initial kyphotic deformity < 35°, and 5) no neurological deficit. The study was designed as a multicenter prospective randomized clinical equivalence trial. The primary outcome measure was the score based on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire assessed at 3 months postinjury. Secondary outcomes are assessed until 2 years of follow-up have been reached, and these domains included pain, functional outcome and generic health-related quality of life, sagittal alignment, length of hospital stay, and complications. Patients in whom no orthotic was used were encouraged to ambulate immediately following randomization, maintaining “neutral spinal alignment” for 8 weeks. The patients in the TLSO group began being weaned from the brace at 8 weeks over a 2-week period. Results Sixty-nine patients were followed to the primary outcome time point, and 47 were followed for up to 1 year. No significant difference was found between treatment groups for any outcome measure at any stage in the follow-up period. There were 4 failures requiring surgical intervention, 3 in the TLSO group and 1 in the non-TLSO group. Conclusions This interim analysis found equivalence between treatment with a TLSO and no orthosis for thoracolumbar AO Type A3 burst fractures. The influence of a brace on early pain control and function and on long-term 1- and 2-year outcomes remains to be determined. However, the authors contend that a thoracolumbar burst fracture, in exclusion of an associated posterior ligamentous complex injury, is inherently a very stable injury and may not require a brace.

scholarly journals Simultaneous implant placement with autogenous onlay bone grafts: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guoqiang Ma ◽  
Chaoan Wu ◽  
Miaoting Shao
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Bone Grafts ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Analysis Model ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Delayed Implant Placement ◽  
Onlay Grafts

AbstractSeveral authors have suggested that implants can be placed simultaneously with onlay bone grafts without affecting outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to answer the following clinical questions: (1) What are the outcomes of implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay bone grafts? And (2) is there a difference in outcomes between simultaneous vs delayed placement of implants with autogenous onlay bone grafts? Databases of PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched up to 15 November 2020. Data on implant survival was extracted from all the included studies (single arm and comparative) to calculate point estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled using the DerSimonian–Laird meta-analysis model. We also compared implant survival rates between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with data from comparative studies. Nineteen studies were included. Five of them compared simultaneous and delayed placement of implants. Dividing the studies based on follow-up duration, the pooled survival of implant placed simultaneously with onlay grafts after <2.5 years of follow-up was 93.1% (95% CI 82.6 to 97.4%) and after 2.5–5 years was 86% (95% CI 78.6 to 91.1%). Implant survival was found to be 85.8% (95% CI 79.6 to 90.3%) with iliac crest grafts and 95.7% (95% CI 83.9 to 93.0%) with intra-oral grafts. Our results indicated no statistically significant difference in implant survival between simultaneous and delayed placement (OR 0.43, 95% 0.07, 2.49, I2=59.04%). Data on implant success and bone loss were limited. Data indicates that implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay grafts have a survival rate of 93.1% and 86% after a follow-up of <2.5 years and 2.5–5years respectively. A limited number of studies indicate no significant difference in implant survival between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with onlay bone grafts. There is a need for randomized controlled trials comparing simultaneous and delayed implant placement to provide robust evidence.

scholarly journals A meta-analysis indicating extra-short implants (≤ 6 mm) as an alternative to longer implants (≥ 8 mm) with bone augmentation

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoran Yu ◽  
Ruogu Xu ◽  
Zhengchuan Zhang ◽  
Yang Yang ◽  
Feilong Deng
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Bone Augmentation ◽  
Moderate Quality ◽  
Short Implants ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Complications Rate

AbstractExtra-short implants, of which clinical outcomes remain controversial, are becoming a potential option rather than long implants with bone augmentation in atrophic partially or totally edentulous jaws. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes and complications between extra-short implants (≤ 6 mm) and longer implants (≥ 8 mm), with and without bone augmentation procedures. Electronic (via PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) and manual searches were performed for articles published prior to November 2020. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing extra-short implants and longer implants in the same study reporting survival rate with an observation period at least 1 year were selected. Data extraction and methodological quality (AMSTAR-2) was assessed by 2 authors independently. A quantitative meta-analysis was performed to compare the survival rate, marginal bone loss (MBL), biological and prosthesis complication rate. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2 and the quality of evidence was determined with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. 21 RCTs were included, among which two were prior registered and 14 adhered to the CONSORT statement. No significant difference was found in the survival rate between extra-short and longer implant at 1- and 3-years follow-up (RR: 1.002, CI 0.981 to 1.024, P = 0.856 at 1 year; RR: 0.996, CI 0.968 to 1.025, P  = 0.772 at 3 years, moderate quality), while longer implants had significantly higher survival rate than extra-short implants (RR: 0.970, CI 0.944 to 0.997, P < 0.05) at 5 years. Interestingly, no significant difference was observed when bone augmentations were performed at 5 years (RR: 0.977, CI 0.945 to 1.010, P = 0.171 for reconstructed bone; RR: 0.955, CI 0.912 to 0.999, P < 0.05 for native bone). Both the MBL (from implant placement) (WMD: − 0.22, CI − 0.277 to − 0.164, P < 0.01, low quality) and biological complications rate (RR: 0.321, CI 0.243 to 0.422, P < 0.01, moderate quality) preferred extra-short implants. However, there was no significant difference in terms of MBL (from prosthesis restoration) (WMD: 0.016, CI − 0.036 to 0.068, P = 0.555, moderate quality) or prosthesis complications rate (RR: 1.308, CI 0.893 to 1.915, P = 0.168, moderate quality). The placement of extra-short implants could be an acceptable alternative to longer implants in atrophic posterior arch. Further high-quality RCTs with a long follow-up period are required to corroborate the present outcomes.Registration number The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020155342).

scholarly journals Treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures: extended follow-up of a randomized clinical trial comparing orthosis versus no orthosis

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer C. Urquhart ◽  
Osama A. Alrehaili ◽  
Charles G. Fisher ◽  
Alyssa Fleming ◽  
Parham Rasoulinejad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Weighted Average ◽  
Average Treatment Effect ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures ◽  
Treatment Comparison ◽  
Average Treatment ◽  
Burst Fractures ◽  
Time Weighted Average

OBJECTIVEA multicenter, prospective, randomized equivalence trial comparing a thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO) to no orthosis (NO) in the treatment of acute AO Type A3 thoracolumbar burst fractures was recently conducted and demonstrated that the two treatments following an otherwise similar management protocol are equivalent at 3 months postinjury. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether there was a difference in long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes between the patients treated with and those treated without a TLSO. Here, the authors present the 5- to 10-year outcomes (mean follow-up 7.9 ± 1.1 years) of the patients at a single site from the original multicenter trial.METHODSBetween July 2002 and January 2009, a total of 96 subjects were enrolled in the primary trial and randomized to two groups: TLSO or NO. Subjects were enrolled if they had an AO Type A3 burst fracture between T-10 and L-3 within the previous 72 hours, kyphotic deformity < 35°, no neurological deficit, and an age of 16–60 years old. The present study represents a subset of those patients: 16 in the TLSO group and 20 in the NO group. The primary outcome measure was the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score at the last 5- to 10-year follow-up. Secondary outcome measures included kyphosis, satisfaction, the Numeric Rating Scale for back pain, and the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) Mental and Physical Component Summary (MCS and PCS) scores. In the original study, outcome measures were administered at admission and 2 and 6 weeks, 3 and 6 months, and 1 and 2 years after injury; in the present extended follow-up study, the outcome measures were administered 5–10 years postinjury. Treatment comparison between patients in the TLSO group and those in the NO group was performed at the latest available follow-up, and the time-weighted average treatment effect was determined using a mixed-effects model of longitudinal regression for repeated measures averaged over all time periods. Missing data were assumed to be missing at random and were replaced with a set of plausible values derived using a multiple imputation procedure.RESULTSThe RMDQ score at 5–10 years postinjury was 3.6 ± 0.9 (mean ± SE) for the TLSO group and 4.8 ± 1.5 for the NO group (p = 0.486, 95% CI −2.3 to 4.8). Average kyphosis was 18.3° ± 2.2° for the TLSO group and 18.6° ± 3.8° for the NO group (p = 0.934, 95% CI −7.8 to 8.5). No differences were found between the NO and TLSO groups with time-weighted average treatment effects for RMDQ 1.9 (95% CI −1.5 to 5.2), for PCS −2.5 (95% CI −7.9 to 3.0), for MCS −1.2 (95% CI −6.7 to 4.2) and for average pain 0.9 (95% CI −0.5 to 2.2).CONCLUSIONSCompared with patients treated with a TLSO, patients treated using early mobilization without orthosis maintain similar pain relief and improvement in function for 5–10 years.

Abstract 13315: Long-term Risk of Cardiovascular Events Following Hospitalization for Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Leah B Kosyakovsky ◽  
Federico Angriman ◽  
Emma Katz ◽  
Neill Adhikari ◽  
Lucas C Godoy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cumulative Incidence ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Sepsis Survivors ◽  
Risk Ratios

Introduction: Sepsis results in dysregulated inflammation, coagulation, and metabolism, which may contribute to increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association between sepsis and subsequent long-term CVD events. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from inception to May 2020 to identify observational studies of adult sepsis survivors (defined by diagnostic codes or consensus definitions) measuring long-term CV outcomes. The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, CV death, and stroke. Random-effects models estimated the pooled cumulative incidence and adjusted hazard ratios of CV events relative to hospital or population controls. Odds ratios were included as risk ratios assuming <10% incidence in non-septic controls, and risk ratios were taken as hazard ratios (HR) assuming no censoring. Outcomes were analyzed at maximum follow-up (primary analysis) and stratified by time (<1 year, 1-2 years, and >2 years) since sepsis. Results: Of 11,235 abstracts screened, 25 studies (22 cohort studies, 2 case-crossover studies, and 1 case-control) involving 1,949,793 sepsis survivors were included. The pooled cumulative incidence of CVD events was 9% (95% CI; 5-14%). Sepsis was associated with an increased risk (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.37-1.86) of CVD events at maximum follow-up ( Figure ); between-study heterogeneity was substantial (I 2 =97.3%). There was no significant difference when comparing studies using population and hospital controls. Significantly elevated risk was observed up to 5 years following sepsis. Conclusions: Sepsis survivors experience an approximately 50% increased risk of CVD events, which may persist for years following the index episode. These results highlight a potential unmet need for early cardiac risk stratification and optimization in sepsis survivors.

Management of fresh odontoid fractures using posterior C1–2 fixation without fusion: a long-term clinical follow-up study

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Keyword(s):  
Scale Score ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Implant Removal ◽  
Odontoid Fractures ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

OBJECTIVE Posterior C1–2 fixation without fusion makes it possible to restore atlantoaxial motion after removing the implant, and it has been used as an alternative technique for odontoid fractures; however, the long-term efficacy of this technique remains uncertain. The purpose of the present study was to explore the long-term follow-up outcomes of patients with odontoid fractures who underwent posterior C1–2 fixation without fusion. METHODS A retrospective study was performed on 62 patients with type II/III fresh odontoid fractures who underwent posterior C1–2 fixation without fusion and were followed up for more than 5 years. The patients were divided into group A (23 patients with implant removal) and group B (39 patients without implant removal) based on whether they underwent a second surgery to remove the implant. The clinical outcomes were recorded and compared between the two groups. In group A, the range of motion (ROM) of C1–2 was calculated, and correlation analysis was performed to explore the factors that influence the ROM of C1–2. RESULTS A solid fracture fusion was found in all patients. At the final follow-up, no significant difference was found in visual analog scale score or American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale score between the two groups (p > 0.05), but patients in group A had a lower Neck Disability Index score and milder neck stiffness than did patients in group B (p < 0.05). In group A, 87.0% (20/23) of the patients had atlantoodontoid joint osteoarthritis at the final follow-up. In group A, the C1–2 ROM in rotation was 6.1° ± 4.5° at the final follow-up, whereas the C1–2 ROM in flexion-extension was 1.8° ± 1.2°. A negative correlation was found between the C1–2 ROM in rotation and the severity of tissue injury in the atlantoaxial region (r = –0.403, p = 0.024) and the degeneration of the atlantoodontoid joint (r = –0.586, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Posterior C1–2 fixation without fusion can be used effectively for the management of fresh odontoid fractures. The removal of the implant can further improve the clinical efficacy, but satisfactory atlantoaxial motion cannot be maintained for a long time after implant removal. A surgeon should reconsider the contribution of posterior C1–2 fixation without fusion and secondary implant removal in preserving atlantoaxial mobility for patients with fresh odontoid fractures.

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