Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜 Nissen 胃底折叠术与经口无切口胃底折叠术或质子泵抑制剂治疗胃食管反流病的疗效比较:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

Efficacy of Laparoscopic Nissen Fundoplication vs Transoral Incisionless Fundoplication or Proton Pump Inhibitors in Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition, Joy McCann Culverhouse Center for Swallowing Disorders, University of South Florida, Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida.

Department of Medicine, Division of Evidence Based Medicine and Outcomes Research, University of South, Florida Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida.

出版信息

Gastroenterology. 2018 Apr;154(5):1298-1308.e7. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.12.021. Epub 2018 Jan 3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The effects of transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) and laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) have been compared with those of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or a sham procedure in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but there has been no direct comparison of TIF vs LNF. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the relative efficacies of TIF vs LNF in patients with GERD.

METHODS

We searched publication databases and conference abstracts through May 10, 2017 for randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy of TIF or LNF with that of a sham procedure or PPIs in patients with GERD. We performed a network meta-analysis using Bayesian methods under random-effects multiple treatment comparisons. We assessed ranking probability by surface under the cumulative ranking curve.

RESULTS

Our search identified 7 trials comprising 1128 patients. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve ranking indicated TIF had highest probability of increasing patients' health-related quality of life (0.96), followed by LNF (0.66), a sham procedure (0.35), and PPIs (0.042). LNF had the highest probability of increasing percent time at pH <4 (0.99), followed by PPIs (0.64), TIF (0.32), and the sham procedure (0.05). LNF also had the highest probability of increasing LES pressure (0.78), followed by TIF (0.72) and PPIs (0.01). Patients who underwent the sham procedure had the highest probability for persistent esophagitis (0.74), followed by those receiving TIF (0.69), LNF (0.38), and PPIs (0.19). Meta-regression showed a shorter follow-up time as a significant confounder for the outcome of health-related quality of life in studies of TIF.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and network meta-analysis of trials of patients with GERD, we found LNF to have the greatest ability to improve physiologic parameters of GERD, including increased LES pressure and decreased percent time pH <4. Although TIF produced the largest increase in health-related quality of life, this could be due to the shorter follow-up time of patients treated with TIF vs LNF or PPIs. TIF is a minimally invasive endoscopic procedure, yet based on evaluation of benefits vs risks, we do not recommend it as a long-term alternative to PPI or LNF treatment of GERD.

摘要

背景与目的

经口无切口胃底折叠术(TIF)和腹腔镜 Nissen 胃底折叠术(LNF)的疗效已与质子泵抑制剂(PPIs)或假手术进行了比较,但是尚未对 TIF 与 LNF 进行直接比较。我们进行了一项系统评价和网状荟萃分析,以比较 GERD 患者中 TIF 与 LNF 的相对疗效。

方法

我们通过搜索出版数据库和会议摘要,于 2017 年 5 月 10 日之前,检索了比较 TIF 或 LNF 与 GERD 患者假手术或 PPIs 疗效的随机对照试验。我们采用贝叶斯随机效应多处理比较法进行网络荟萃分析。我们通过累积排序曲线下面积来评估排序概率。

结果

我们的检索共确定了 7 项试验,包含 1128 例患者。累积排序曲线下面积排序表明 TIF 提高患者健康相关生活质量的概率最高(0.96),其次是 LNF(0.66)、假手术(0.35)和 PPIs(0.042)。LNF 提高 pH 值<4 的时间百分比的概率最高(0.99),其次是 PPIs(0.64)、TIF(0.32)和假手术(0.05)。LNF 还具有提高食管下括约肌(LES)压力的最高概率(0.78),其次是 TIF(0.72)和 PPIs(0.01)。假手术组患者持续性食管炎的概率最高(0.74),其次是 TIF 组(0.69)、LNF 组(0.38)和 PPI 组(0.19)。Meta 回归显示,随访时间较短是 TIF 治疗结局的重要混杂因素。

结论

在对 GERD 患者的试验进行系统评价和网络荟萃分析中,我们发现 LNF 改善 GERD 生理参数的能力最强,包括增加 LES 压力和减少 pH 值<4 的时间百分比。尽管 TIF 对健康相关生活质量的改善最大,但这可能是由于 TIF 与 LNF 或 PPI 治疗 GERD 的患者随访时间较短所致。TIF 是一种微创内镜手术,但基于效益与风险的评估,我们不建议将其作为 PPI 或 LNF 治疗 GERD 的长期替代方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验