Joel E Richter1, Ambuj Kumar2, Seth Lipka3, Branko Miladinovic2, Vic Velanovich4. 1. Department of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition, Joy McCann Culverhouse Center for Swallowing Disorders, University of South Florida, Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida. Electronic address: jrichte1@health.usf.edu. 2. Department of Medicine, Division of Evidence Based Medicine and Outcomes Research, University of South, Florida Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida. 3. Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition, University of South Florida, Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida. 4. Division of General Surgery, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida.
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.
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.
Authors: Shivanand Bomman; Sofya Malashanka; Adil Ghafoor; David J Sanders; Shayan Irani; Richard A Kozarek; Andrew Ross; Michal Hubka; Rajesh Krishnamoorthi Journal: Clin Endosc Date: 2022-08-17