Efficacy of different endoscopic treatments for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

There are no direct comparisons across different endoscopic therapies for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This study aimed to evaluate the relative effects of different endoscopic therapies in GERD. Five databases were searched until August 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that c...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of gastrointestinal surgery 2024-07, Vol.28 (7), p.1051-1061
Hauptverfasser: Yao, Lijia, Lin, Yanfang, He, Xiaojian, Liu, Gang, Wang, Baoshan, Wang, Wen, Li, Dongliang
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1061
container_issue 7
container_start_page 1051
container_title Journal of gastrointestinal surgery
container_volume 28
creator Yao, Lijia
Lin, Yanfang
He, Xiaojian
Liu, Gang
Wang, Baoshan
Wang, Wen
Li, Dongliang
description There are no direct comparisons across different endoscopic therapies for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This study aimed to evaluate the relative effects of different endoscopic therapies in GERD. Five databases were searched until August 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of endoscopic band ligation (EBL), Stretta, endoscopic fundoplication (transoral incisionless fundoplication [TIF], endoscopic full-thickness plication [EFTP], and EndoCinch plication procedure [EndoCinch, CR BARD, Billerica, Mass., USA]), or proton pump inhibitors (PPIs)/sham procedure for GERD. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed. A total of 19 trials comprising 1181 patients were included. EBL (mean difference [MD], −7.75; 95% credible interval [CrI], −13.90 to −1.44), Stretta (MD, −9.86; 95% CrI, −19.05 to −0.58), and TIF (MD, −12.58; 95% CrI, −20.23 to −4.91) all significantly improved patients’ health-related quality of life score with equivalent efficacy compared with PPIs. TIF and EBL achieved equivalent efficacy in reducing PPIs utility (risk ratio [RR], 0.66; 95% CrI, 0.40–1.05) and both were significantly superior to other endoscopic interventions (Stretta, EFTP, and EndoCinch). Besides, EBL and TIF also could significantly decrease the esophagitis incidence compared with PPIs (EBL [RR, 0.34; 95% CrI, 0.22–0.48] and TIF [RR, 0.38; 95% CrI, 0.15–0.88]). In terms of lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, only TIF could significantly increase the LES pressure (MD, 6.53; 95% CrI, 3.65–9.40) to PPIs. In contrast, TIF was inferior to PPIs in decreasing esophageal acid exposure (MD, 2.57; 95% CrI, 0.77–4.36). Combining the evidence, EBL and TIF may have comparable efficacy and both might be superior to Stretta, EFTP, or EndoCinch in GERD treatment.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.gassur.2024.04.020
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3047939936</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1091255X24004219</els_id><sourcerecordid>3047939936</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c311t-741031b856c8292941ecacd6f4c4b3374c95dcba400301b5f13fdbfb0993f7193</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kF9rFTEQxYNY2lr7DUTy6MveTjbZfz4IUloVCr5U8C1kk0nNdXdzzWSt98XP3pRb-ygMZAjnzJn5MfZGwEaAaC-2mztDtKZNDbXaQKkaXrBT0XeyUm3dviw9DKKqm-b7CXtFtAUQHYj-mJ3Ivu1ASXHK_l55H6yxex49d8F7TLhkjouLZOMuWJ4TmjyXT-I-Jl5Cc4pIcffD3KGZeEI_rX-Kl9AQvueG054yziYXc8LfAe-5WRxfMN_H9JPPmE1lFjPtKdBrduTNRHj-9J6xb9dXt5efq5uvn75cfryprBQiV50SIMXYN63t66EelMCys2u9smqUslN2aJwdjQKQIMbGC-nd6EcYBuk7Mcgz9u4wd5firxUp6zmQxWkyC8aVtATVDbKo2yJVB6lNkahcp3cpzCbttQD9SF5v9YG8fiSvoVQNxfb2KWEdZ3TPpn-oi-DDQYDlzkIlabIBF4suJLRZuxj-n_AA4EqZnw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3047939936</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Efficacy of different endoscopic treatments for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Yao, Lijia ; Lin, Yanfang ; He, Xiaojian ; Liu, Gang ; Wang, Baoshan ; Wang, Wen ; Li, Dongliang</creator><creatorcontrib>Yao, Lijia ; Lin, Yanfang ; He, Xiaojian ; Liu, Gang ; Wang, Baoshan ; Wang, Wen ; Li, Dongliang</creatorcontrib><description>There are no direct comparisons across different endoscopic therapies for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This study aimed to evaluate the relative effects of different endoscopic therapies in GERD. Five databases were searched until August 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of endoscopic band ligation (EBL), Stretta, endoscopic fundoplication (transoral incisionless fundoplication [TIF], endoscopic full-thickness plication [EFTP], and EndoCinch plication procedure [EndoCinch, CR BARD, Billerica, Mass., USA]), or proton pump inhibitors (PPIs)/sham procedure for GERD. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed. A total of 19 trials comprising 1181 patients were included. EBL (mean difference [MD], −7.75; 95% credible interval [CrI], −13.90 to −1.44), Stretta (MD, −9.86; 95% CrI, −19.05 to −0.58), and TIF (MD, −12.58; 95% CrI, −20.23 to −4.91) all significantly improved patients’ health-related quality of life score with equivalent efficacy compared with PPIs. TIF and EBL achieved equivalent efficacy in reducing PPIs utility (risk ratio [RR], 0.66; 95% CrI, 0.40–1.05) and both were significantly superior to other endoscopic interventions (Stretta, EFTP, and EndoCinch). Besides, EBL and TIF also could significantly decrease the esophagitis incidence compared with PPIs (EBL [RR, 0.34; 95% CrI, 0.22–0.48] and TIF [RR, 0.38; 95% CrI, 0.15–0.88]). In terms of lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, only TIF could significantly increase the LES pressure (MD, 6.53; 95% CrI, 3.65–9.40) to PPIs. In contrast, TIF was inferior to PPIs in decreasing esophageal acid exposure (MD, 2.57; 95% CrI, 0.77–4.36). Combining the evidence, EBL and TIF may have comparable efficacy and both might be superior to Stretta, EFTP, or EndoCinch in GERD treatment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1091-255X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1873-4626</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-4626</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.gassur.2024.04.020</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38670431</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Fundoplication ; Fundoplication - methods ; Gastroesophageal Reflux - surgery ; Gastroesophageal reflux disease ; Humans ; Ligation ; Ligation - methods ; Network Meta-Analysis ; Proton Pump Inhibitors - therapeutic use ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Stretta ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 2024-07, Vol.28 (7), p.1051-1061</ispartof><rights>2024 Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c311t-741031b856c8292941ecacd6f4c4b3374c95dcba400301b5f13fdbfb0993f7193</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38670431$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Yao, Lijia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Yanfang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>He, Xiaojian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Gang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Baoshan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Wen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Dongliang</creatorcontrib><title>Efficacy of different endoscopic treatments for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis</title><title>Journal of gastrointestinal surgery</title><addtitle>J Gastrointest Surg</addtitle><description>There are no direct comparisons across different endoscopic therapies for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This study aimed to evaluate the relative effects of different endoscopic therapies in GERD. Five databases were searched until August 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of endoscopic band ligation (EBL), Stretta, endoscopic fundoplication (transoral incisionless fundoplication [TIF], endoscopic full-thickness plication [EFTP], and EndoCinch plication procedure [EndoCinch, CR BARD, Billerica, Mass., USA]), or proton pump inhibitors (PPIs)/sham procedure for GERD. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed. A total of 19 trials comprising 1181 patients were included. EBL (mean difference [MD], −7.75; 95% credible interval [CrI], −13.90 to −1.44), Stretta (MD, −9.86; 95% CrI, −19.05 to −0.58), and TIF (MD, −12.58; 95% CrI, −20.23 to −4.91) all significantly improved patients’ health-related quality of life score with equivalent efficacy compared with PPIs. TIF and EBL achieved equivalent efficacy in reducing PPIs utility (risk ratio [RR], 0.66; 95% CrI, 0.40–1.05) and both were significantly superior to other endoscopic interventions (Stretta, EFTP, and EndoCinch). Besides, EBL and TIF also could significantly decrease the esophagitis incidence compared with PPIs (EBL [RR, 0.34; 95% CrI, 0.22–0.48] and TIF [RR, 0.38; 95% CrI, 0.15–0.88]). In terms of lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, only TIF could significantly increase the LES pressure (MD, 6.53; 95% CrI, 3.65–9.40) to PPIs. In contrast, TIF was inferior to PPIs in decreasing esophageal acid exposure (MD, 2.57; 95% CrI, 0.77–4.36). Combining the evidence, EBL and TIF may have comparable efficacy and both might be superior to Stretta, EFTP, or EndoCinch in GERD treatment.</description><subject>Fundoplication</subject><subject>Fundoplication - methods</subject><subject>Gastroesophageal Reflux - surgery</subject><subject>Gastroesophageal reflux disease</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Ligation</subject><subject>Ligation - methods</subject><subject>Network Meta-Analysis</subject><subject>Proton Pump Inhibitors - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Stretta</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1091-255X</issn><issn>1873-4626</issn><issn>1873-4626</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kF9rFTEQxYNY2lr7DUTy6MveTjbZfz4IUloVCr5U8C1kk0nNdXdzzWSt98XP3pRb-ygMZAjnzJn5MfZGwEaAaC-2mztDtKZNDbXaQKkaXrBT0XeyUm3dviw9DKKqm-b7CXtFtAUQHYj-mJ3Ivu1ASXHK_l55H6yxex49d8F7TLhkjouLZOMuWJ4TmjyXT-I-Jl5Cc4pIcffD3KGZeEI_rX-Kl9AQvueG054yziYXc8LfAe-5WRxfMN_H9JPPmE1lFjPtKdBrduTNRHj-9J6xb9dXt5efq5uvn75cfryprBQiV50SIMXYN63t66EelMCys2u9smqUslN2aJwdjQKQIMbGC-nd6EcYBuk7Mcgz9u4wd5firxUp6zmQxWkyC8aVtATVDbKo2yJVB6lNkahcp3cpzCbttQD9SF5v9YG8fiSvoVQNxfb2KWEdZ3TPpn-oi-DDQYDlzkIlabIBF4suJLRZuxj-n_AA4EqZnw</recordid><startdate>20240701</startdate><enddate>20240701</enddate><creator>Yao, Lijia</creator><creator>Lin, Yanfang</creator><creator>He, Xiaojian</creator><creator>Liu, Gang</creator><creator>Wang, Baoshan</creator><creator>Wang, Wen</creator><creator>Li, Dongliang</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240701</creationdate><title>Efficacy of different endoscopic treatments for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis</title><author>Yao, Lijia ; Lin, Yanfang ; He, Xiaojian ; Liu, Gang ; Wang, Baoshan ; Wang, Wen ; Li, Dongliang</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c311t-741031b856c8292941ecacd6f4c4b3374c95dcba400301b5f13fdbfb0993f7193</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Fundoplication</topic><topic>Fundoplication - methods</topic><topic>Gastroesophageal Reflux - surgery</topic><topic>Gastroesophageal reflux disease</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Ligation</topic><topic>Ligation - methods</topic><topic>Network Meta-Analysis</topic><topic>Proton Pump Inhibitors - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Stretta</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Yao, Lijia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Yanfang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>He, Xiaojian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Gang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Baoshan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Wen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Dongliang</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of gastrointestinal surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Yao, Lijia</au><au>Lin, Yanfang</au><au>He, Xiaojian</au><au>Liu, Gang</au><au>Wang, Baoshan</au><au>Wang, Wen</au><au>Li, Dongliang</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Efficacy of different endoscopic treatments for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of gastrointestinal surgery</jtitle><addtitle>J Gastrointest Surg</addtitle><date>2024-07-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1051</spage><epage>1061</epage><pages>1051-1061</pages><issn>1091-255X</issn><issn>1873-4626</issn><eissn>1873-4626</eissn><abstract>There are no direct comparisons across different endoscopic therapies for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This study aimed to evaluate the relative effects of different endoscopic therapies in GERD. Five databases were searched until August 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of endoscopic band ligation (EBL), Stretta, endoscopic fundoplication (transoral incisionless fundoplication [TIF], endoscopic full-thickness plication [EFTP], and EndoCinch plication procedure [EndoCinch, CR BARD, Billerica, Mass., USA]), or proton pump inhibitors (PPIs)/sham procedure for GERD. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed. A total of 19 trials comprising 1181 patients were included. EBL (mean difference [MD], −7.75; 95% credible interval [CrI], −13.90 to −1.44), Stretta (MD, −9.86; 95% CrI, −19.05 to −0.58), and TIF (MD, −12.58; 95% CrI, −20.23 to −4.91) all significantly improved patients’ health-related quality of life score with equivalent efficacy compared with PPIs. TIF and EBL achieved equivalent efficacy in reducing PPIs utility (risk ratio [RR], 0.66; 95% CrI, 0.40–1.05) and both were significantly superior to other endoscopic interventions (Stretta, EFTP, and EndoCinch). Besides, EBL and TIF also could significantly decrease the esophagitis incidence compared with PPIs (EBL [RR, 0.34; 95% CrI, 0.22–0.48] and TIF [RR, 0.38; 95% CrI, 0.15–0.88]). In terms of lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, only TIF could significantly increase the LES pressure (MD, 6.53; 95% CrI, 3.65–9.40) to PPIs. In contrast, TIF was inferior to PPIs in decreasing esophageal acid exposure (MD, 2.57; 95% CrI, 0.77–4.36). Combining the evidence, EBL and TIF may have comparable efficacy and both might be superior to Stretta, EFTP, or EndoCinch in GERD treatment.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>38670431</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.gassur.2024.04.020</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1091-255X
ispartof Journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 2024-07, Vol.28 (7), p.1051-1061
issn 1091-255X
1873-4626
1873-4626
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3047939936
source MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Fundoplication
Fundoplication - methods
Gastroesophageal Reflux - surgery
Gastroesophageal reflux disease
Humans
Ligation
Ligation - methods
Network Meta-Analysis
Proton Pump Inhibitors - therapeutic use
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Stretta
Treatment Outcome
title Efficacy of different endoscopic treatments for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T14%3A09%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Efficacy%20of%20different%20endoscopic%20treatments%20for%20gastroesophageal%20reflux%20disease:%20a%20systematic%20review%20and%20network%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20gastrointestinal%20surgery&rft.au=Yao,%20Lijia&rft.date=2024-07-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1051&rft.epage=1061&rft.pages=1051-1061&rft.issn=1091-255X&rft.eissn=1873-4626&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.gassur.2024.04.020&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3047939936%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3047939936&rft_id=info:pmid/38670431&rft_els_id=S1091255X24004219&rfr_iscdi=true