scholarly journals PERORAL (POEM) OR SURGICAL MYOTOMY FOR THE TREATMENT OF ACHALASIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

2020 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafael Krieger MARTINS ◽  
Igor Braga RIBEIRO ◽  
Diogo Turiani Hourneaux DE MOURA ◽  
Kelly E HATHORN ◽  
Wanderley Marques BERNARDO ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Heller Myotomy ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy ◽  
Eckardt Score ◽  
Post Procedure

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Achalasia is a neurodegenerative motility esophageal disorder characterized by failure of lower esophageal sphincter relaxation. The conventional treatment option for achalasia has been laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM). However, in 2010, Inoue et al. described peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), a minimally invasive procedure, as an alternative therapy. To date, some studies with small sample sizes have aimed to compare outcomes of LHM vs POEM. OBJECTIVE: Thus, the aim of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to better evaluate the efficacy and safety of these two techniques. METHODS: Individualized search strategies were developed from inception through April 2019 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Variables analyzed included operative time, overall adverse events rate, post-procedure gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), hospitalization length, post-procedure pain score, and Eckardt Score reduction. RESULTS: Twelve cohort trials were selected, consisting of 893 patients (359 in POEM group and 534 in LHM.) No randomized clinical trials were available. There was no difference in operative time (MD= -10,26, 95% CI (-5,6 to 8,2), P<0.001) or Post-Operative Gastroesophageal Reflux (RD: -0.00, 95%CI: (-0.09, 0.09), I2: 0%). There was decreased length of hospital stay for POEM (MD: -0.6, 95% CI (-1.11, -0.09), P=0.02), and an increased mean reduction in Eckardt score in POEM patients (MD = -0.257, 95% CI: (-0.512 to -0.002), P=0.048), with similar rates of adverse events. CONCLUSION: POEM demonstrated similar results compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy with regards to improvement of dysphagia, post-procedure reflux, and surgical time, with the benefit of shorter length of hospital stay. Therefore, POEM can be considered an option for patients with achalasia.

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 Handwash versus hand-rub practices for preventing nosocomial infection in hospital intensive care units: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 82-90
Author(s):  
S Bello ◽  
EA Bamgboye ◽  
DT Ajayi ◽  
EN Ossai ◽  
EC Aniwada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Nosocomial Infection ◽  
Intensive Care Units ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Infection Rates

Background: Compliance with handwashing in busy healthcare facilities, such as intensive care units (ICUs), is suboptimal and alcohol hand-rub preparations have been suggested to improve compliance. There is no evidence on the comparative effectiveness between handwash and hand-rub strategies. This systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of handwash versus hand-rub strategies for preventing nosocomial infection in ICUs. Methods Studies conducted in ICUs and indexed in PubMed comparing the clinical effectiveness and adverse events between handwash and hand-rub groups were included in a systematic review. The primary outcome was nosocomial infection rates. Secondary outcomes included microbial counts on healthcare providers’ hands, mortality rates, patient/hospital cost of treatment of healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs), length of ICU/hospital stays, and adverse events. Studies were independently screened and data extracted by at least two authors. Meta-analyses of risk ratios (RR), incidence rate ratios (IRR), odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD), were conducted using the RevMan 5.3 software. Results: Seven studies published between 1992-2009 and involving a total of 11,663 patients were included. Five studies (10,981 patients) contributed data to the ICU acquired nosocomial infection rates. The pooled IRR was 0.71 (95% CI 0.61, 0.82; I2 = 94%). On sensitivity analysis, pooled IRR was 0.39 (95% CI 0.32, 0.48; 4 studies; 8,247 patients; I2 = 0%) in favour of hand rub. The pooled OR for mortality was 0.95 (95% CI 0.78, 1.61; 4 studies; 3,475 patients; I2 = 39%). The pooled MD for length of hospital stay was -0.74 (95% CI -2.83, 1.34; 3 studies; 741 patients; I2 = 0%). The pooled OR for an undesirable skin effect was 0.37 (95% CI 0.23, 0.60; 3 studies;1504 patients; I2 = 0%) in favour of hand rub. Overall quality of evidence was low. Conclusion: Hand rub appeared more effective when compared to handwash in ICUs.

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.

scholarly journals Efficacy and harms of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Piscoya ◽  
Luis Fernando Ng-Sueng ◽  
Angela Parra del Riego ◽  
Renato Cerna-Viacava ◽  
Vinay Pasupuleti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Clinical Improvement ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Meta Analyses

AbstractBackgroundWe evaluated the efficacy and safety of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19.MethodsSystematic review in five engines, pre-print webpages and RCT registries until May 22, 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies evaluating remdesivir on confirmed, COVID-19 adults with pneumonia and/or respiratory insufficiency. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, clinical improvement or recovery, need for invasive ventilation, and serious adverse events (SAE). Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, progression of pneumonia, and adverse events (AE). Inverse variance random effects meta-analyses were performed.ResultsTwo placebo-controlled RCTs (n=1300) and two case series (n=88) were included. All studies used remdesivir 200mg IV the first day and 100mg IV for 9 more days, and followed up until 28 days. Wang et al. RCT was stopped early due to AEs; ACTT-1 was preliminary reported at 15-day follow up. Time to clinical improvement was not decreased in Wang et al. RCT, but median time to recovery was decreased by 4 days in ACTT-1. Remdesivir did not decrease all-cause mortality (RR 0.71, 95%CI 0.39 to 1.28) and need for invasive ventilation at 14 days (RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.23 to 1.42), but had fewer SAEs (RR 0.77, 95%CI 0.63 to 0.94). AEs were similar between remdesivir and placebo arms. Risk of bias ranged from some concerns to high risk in RCTs.InterpretationThere is paucity of adequately powered and fully reported RCTs evaluating effects of remdesivir in adult, hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Remdesivir should not be recommended for the treatment of severe COVID-19.

Tu1248 Achalasia Treatment With Pneumatic Balloon Dilation (PBD) Versus Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy (LHM). Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 85 (5) ◽  
pp. AB600
Author(s):  
Priscilla C. Bonifacio ◽  
Nadia Korkischko ◽  
Marina L. Passos ◽  
Mileine V. de Matos ◽  
Julio Cesar M. Aquino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Heller Myotomy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Balloon Dilation ◽  
Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy ◽  
Pneumatic Balloon Dilation

scholarly journals Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage versus percutaneous cholecystostomy for high risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Endoscopy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (08) ◽  
pp. 722-732 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sally Wai-Yin Luk ◽  
Shayan Irani ◽  
Rajesh Krishnamoorthi ◽  
James Yun Wong Lau ◽  
Enders Kwok Wai Ng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Acute Cholecystitis ◽  
Clinical Success ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Surgical Patients ◽  
Technical Success ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Post Procedure ◽  
Hospital Stays

Abstract Background Recent evidence suggests that endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is an effective and safe alternative to percutaneous drainage (PT-GBD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare these two procedures in high risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis. Methods A comprehensive electronic literature search was conducted for all articles published up to October 2017 to identify comparative studies between EUS-GBD and PT-GBD. A meta-analysis was performed on outcomes including technical success, clinical success, post-procedure adverse events, length of hospital stay, unplanned hospital readmission, need for reintervention, recurrent cholecystitis, and disease- or treatment-related mortality for these two procedures. Results Five comparative studies (206 patients in the EUS-GBD group vs. 289 patients in the PT-GBD group), were included in the final analysis. There were no statistically significant differences in technical success (odds ratio [OR] 0.43, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.12 to 1.58; P  = 0.21; I 2 = 0 %) and clinical success (OR 1.07, 95 %CI 0.36 to 3.16; P  = 0.90; I 2 = 44 %) between the two procedures. EUS-GBD had fewer adverse events than PT-GBD (OR 0.43, 95 %CI 0.18 to 1.00; P  = 0.05; I 2 = 66 %). Moreover, patients undergoing EUS-GBD had shorter hospital stays, with pooled standard mean difference of – 2.53 (95 %CI – 4.28 to – 0.78; P = 0.005; I 2 = 98 %), and required significantly fewer reinterventions (OR 0.16, 95 %CI 0.04 to 0.042; P <  0.001; I 2 = 32 %) resulting in significantly fewer unplanned readmissions (OR 0.16, 95 %CI 0.05 to 0.53; P  = 0.003; I 2 = 79 %). Conclusions EUS-GBD was associated with lower rates of post-procedure adverse events, shorter hospital stays, and fewer reinterventions and readmissions compared with PT-GBD in patients with acute cholecystitis who were unfit for surgery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document