Transoral Incisionless Fundoplication for Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. S214
Author(s):  
Thomas R. McCarty ◽  
Basile Njei ◽  
Tarun Rustagi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽  
Reflux Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Transoral Incisionless Fundoplication

Efficacy of transoral incisionless fundoplication for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Endoscopy ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 50 (07) ◽  
pp. 708-725 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas McCarty ◽  
Michael Itidiare ◽  
Basile Njei ◽  
Tarun Rustagi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Reflux Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Transoral Incisionless Fundoplication ◽  
Refractory Gerd

Abstract Background Given poor symptomatic response rates and rising awareness of the adverse events associated with the long-term use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), endoscopic modalities for treatment of refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) have become more prominent. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate feasibility, efficacy, and tolerability of transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) for the treatment of refractory GERD. Methods Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were performed to March 2017. Measured outcomes included immediate technical success rate and serious adverse events. Symptomatic improvement was measured using GERD Health-related Quality of Life (HRQL), Gastroesophageal Reflux Symptom Score (GERSS), and Reflux Symptom Index (RSI). Objective success was determined by hiatal hernia reduction and pH monitoring. Results 32 studies (1475 patients; 48.2 % male) met inclusion criteria. TIF success rate was 99 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 97 to 100; P < 0.001), with an adverse event rate of 2 % (95 %CI 1 to 3; P < 0.001). GERD HRQL, GERSS, and RSI improved significantly post-TIF (mean difference 17.72, 95 %CI 17.31 to 18.14; mean difference 23.78, 95 %CI 22.96 to 24.60; mean difference 14.28, 95 %CI 13.56 to 15.01; all P < 0.001, respectively). Hernia reduction occurred in 91 % of patients (95 %CI 83 to 98; P < 0.001). DeMeester scores improved significantly (mean difference 10.22, 95 %CI 8.38 to 12.12; P < 0.001). PPI therapy was discontinued post-procedure in 89 % of patients (95 %CI 82 to 95; P < 0.001). Conclusions TIF appears to be a safe and effective endoscopic procedure for patients with refractory GERD. Future controlled trials are needed to directly compare efficacy, long-term durability, and safety between TIF and Nissen fundoplication.

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 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.

scholarly journals Epidemiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease in Iran: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Karimian ◽  
Hassan Nourmohammadi ◽  
Majid Salamati ◽  
Mohammad Reza Hafezi Ahmadi ◽  
Fatemeh Kazemi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Reflux Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Iranian Population ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Online Databases

Abstract Background Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), which leads to acid reflux into the esophagus, is a common gastrointestinal disorder. Several studies have shown the prevalence of GERD in Iranian population, but their evidence is contradictory. Therefore, the present study was conducted to investigate the epidemiology of GERD in Iran. Methods The entire steps of this systematic review and meta-analysis were based on the MOOSE protocol, and the results were reported accordance with the PRISMA guideline. This review is registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020142861). To find potentially relevant published articles, comprehensive search was done on international online databases Scopus, Science Direct, EMBASE, PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Iranian online databases and the Google Scholar search engine in June 2019. Cochran test and I2 index were used to assess the heterogeneity of the studies. Data were analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software ver. 2. The significance level of the test was considered to be P <  0.05. Results The daily, weekly, monthly, and overall prevalence of GERD symptoms in Iranian population was 5.64% (95%CI [confidence interval]: 3.77–8.35%; N = 66,398), 12.50% (95%CI: 9.63–16.08%; N = 110,388), 18.62% (95%CI: 12.90–26.12%; N = 70,749) and 43.07% (95%CI: 35.00–51.53%; N = 73,189), respectively. The daily, weekly, monthly, and overall prevalence of heartburn in Iranian population was 2.46% (95%CI: 0.93–6.39%; N = 18,774), 9.52% (95%CI: 6.16–14.41%; N = 54,125), 8.19% (95%CI: 2.42–24.30%; N = 19,363) and 23.20% (95%CI: 13.56–36.79%; N = 26,543), respectively. The daily, weekly, monthly, and overall prevalence of regurgitation in Iranian population was 4.00% (95%CI: 1.88–8.32%; N = 18,774), 9.79% (95%CI: 5.99–15.60%; N = 41,140), 13.76% (95%CI: 6.18–44.31%; N = 19,363) and 36.53% (95%CI: 19.30–58.08%; N = 21,174), respectively. The sensitivity analysis for prevalence of all types GERD, heartburn and regurgitation symptoms by removing a study showed that the overall estimate is still robust. Conclusion The present meta-analysis provides comprehensive and useful information on the epidemiology of GERD in Iran for policy-makers and health care providers. This study showed a high prevalence of GERD in Iran. Therefore, effective measures on GERD-related factors such as lifestyle can be among the health policies of Iran.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document