Endoscopic gastric plication: a network meta-analysis

Pub Date : 2024-01-23 DOI:10.1097/io9.0000000000000008
Issaree Laopeamthong, Wisit Kasetsermwiriya, Suphakarn Techapongsatorn, A. Tansawet
{"title":"Endoscopic gastric plication: a network meta-analysis","authors":"Issaree Laopeamthong, Wisit Kasetsermwiriya, Suphakarn Techapongsatorn, A. Tansawet","doi":"10.1097/io9.0000000000000008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Bariatric surgery is associated with sustainable weight loss and lower mortality. Presently, these procedures can be performed endoscopically. Among endoscopic procedures, endoscopic gastric plication (EGP) is the most studied but has not yet been compared among its variations.\n \n \n \n Studies were identified by searching database and reference lists. They would be eligible if they were conducted in adult patients with obesity, did not involve revision, compared EGP and controls, and reported at least 1-year weight loss results. The interventions of interest were endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG), primary obesity surgery endoluminal (POSE), and transoral gastroplasty (TOGA). The primary outcome was the percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL). From network meta-analysis, treatment comparisons between each intervention were estimated. The interventions were further ranked in terms of maximizing weight loss or minimizing severe adverse events (SAEs).\n \n \n \n Significant %EWLs from ESG and POSE versus control were observed at 12 months with pooled mean differences (MDs) and 95% CI of 44.7% (27.95%, 61.45%) and 16.29% (0.32%, 32.26%), respectively. The results also indicated that ESG was more efficacious than POSE [MD (95% CI): 28.41% (5.27%, 51.56%)] and TOGA [MD (95% CI): 36% (11.38%, 60.62%)]. For SAEs, ESG, POSE, and TOGA yielded relative risks (95% CI) of 2.81 (0.14, 56.85), 2.15 (0.13, 36.48), and 3.26 (0.07, 153.3), respectively, compared with the control.\n \n \n \n ESG was the best EGP, followed by POSE and TOGA. No significant increase in SAE was indicated from EGP. This network meta-analysis must be updated when more data are available.\n","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/io9.0000000000000008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Bariatric surgery is associated with sustainable weight loss and lower mortality. Presently, these procedures can be performed endoscopically. Among endoscopic procedures, endoscopic gastric plication (EGP) is the most studied but has not yet been compared among its variations. Studies were identified by searching database and reference lists. They would be eligible if they were conducted in adult patients with obesity, did not involve revision, compared EGP and controls, and reported at least 1-year weight loss results. The interventions of interest were endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG), primary obesity surgery endoluminal (POSE), and transoral gastroplasty (TOGA). The primary outcome was the percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL). From network meta-analysis, treatment comparisons between each intervention were estimated. The interventions were further ranked in terms of maximizing weight loss or minimizing severe adverse events (SAEs). Significant %EWLs from ESG and POSE versus control were observed at 12 months with pooled mean differences (MDs) and 95% CI of 44.7% (27.95%, 61.45%) and 16.29% (0.32%, 32.26%), respectively. The results also indicated that ESG was more efficacious than POSE [MD (95% CI): 28.41% (5.27%, 51.56%)] and TOGA [MD (95% CI): 36% (11.38%, 60.62%)]. For SAEs, ESG, POSE, and TOGA yielded relative risks (95% CI) of 2.81 (0.14, 56.85), 2.15 (0.13, 36.48), and 3.26 (0.07, 153.3), respectively, compared with the control. ESG was the best EGP, followed by POSE and TOGA. No significant increase in SAE was indicated from EGP. This network meta-analysis must be updated when more data are available.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
内镜胃成形术:网络荟萃分析
减肥手术可持续减轻体重,降低死亡率。目前,这些手术都可以在内窥镜下进行。在内镜手术中,内镜胃成形术(EGP)是研究最多的一种,但尚未对其各种变体进行比较。 我们通过搜索数据库和参考文献列表确定了相关研究。只要研究对象是成年肥胖症患者,不涉及翻修,比较了 EGP 和对照组,并报告了至少 1 年的体重减轻结果,就符合条件。相关干预措施包括内镜袖带胃成形术(ESG)、原发性肥胖症腔内手术(POSE)和经口胃成形术(TOGA)。主要结果是超重百分比(%EWL)。通过网络荟萃分析,估算出了每种干预方法之间的治疗效果比较。根据体重减轻最大化或严重不良事件(SAEs)最小化的原则,对干预措施进行了进一步排序。 在 12 个月时,观察到 ESG 和 POSE 与对照组相比有显著的%EWL,集合平均差(MD)和 95% CI 分别为 44.7% (27.95%, 61.45%) 和 16.29% (0.32%, 32.26%)。结果还显示,ESG 比 POSE [MD (95% CI): 28.41% (5.27%, 51.56%)]和 TOGA [MD (95% CI): 36% (11.38%, 60.62%)]更有效。就 SAEs 而言,与对照组相比,ESG、POSE 和 TOGA 的相对风险(95% CI)分别为 2.81(0.14,56.85)、2.15(0.13,36.48)和 3.26(0.07,153.3)。 ESG 是最好的 EGP,其次是 POSE 和 TOGA。EGP 的 SAE 没有明显增加。在获得更多数据后,必须对该网络荟萃分析进行更新。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1