Brent Hiramoto, Thomas R McCarty, N. Lodhia, Andrew Jenkins, A. Elnaiem, Mayssan Muftah, Ryan Flanagan, Walter W. Chan
{"title":"Quantified Metrics of Gastric Emptying Delay by GLP-1 Agonists: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Insights for Periprocedural Management.","authors":"Brent Hiramoto, Thomas R McCarty, N. Lodhia, Andrew Jenkins, A. Elnaiem, Mayssan Muftah, Ryan Flanagan, Walter W. Chan","doi":"10.14309/ajg.0000000000002820","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION\nDivergent recommendations for periprocedural management of GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) medications rely on limited evidence. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide quantitative measures of gastric emptying relevant to mechanisms of weight loss and to periprocedural management of GLP-1 RA. We hypothesized that the magnitude of gastric emptying delay would be low and of limited clinical significance to procedural sedation risks.\n\n\nMETHODS\nA protocolized search identified studies on GLP-1 RA that quantified gastric emptying measures. Pooled estimates using random effects were presented as weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Univariate meta-regression was performed to assess the influence of GLP-1 RA type, short- vs long-acting mechanism of action, and duration of treatment on gastric emptying.\n\n\nRESULTS\nFifteen studies met inclusion criteria. Five studies (n=247) utilized scintigraphy (GES). Mean T1/2 was 138.4 minutes (CI:74.5-202.3) for GLP-1 RA versus 95.0 minutes (CI:54.9-135.0) for placebo, with pooled mean difference of 36.0 minutes (CI:17.0-55.0, p<0.01, I2=79.4%). Ten studies (n=411) utilized the acetaminophen absorption test (AAT), with no significant delay in gastric emptying measured by Tmax, AUC4hr, and AUC5hr with GLP-1 RA (p>0.05). On meta-regression, type of GLP-1 RA, mechanism of action, and treatment duration did not impact gastric emptying (p>0.05).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nWhile a gastric emptying delay of ∼36 minutes is quantifiable on GLP-1 RA medications, it is of limited magnitude relative to standard periprocedural fasting periods. There were no substantial differences in gastric emptying on modalities reflective of liquid emptying (AAT), particularly at time points relevant to periprocedural care.","PeriodicalId":507623,"journal":{"name":"The American Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14309/ajg.0000000000002820","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
INTRODUCTION
Divergent recommendations for periprocedural management of GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) medications rely on limited evidence. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide quantitative measures of gastric emptying relevant to mechanisms of weight loss and to periprocedural management of GLP-1 RA. We hypothesized that the magnitude of gastric emptying delay would be low and of limited clinical significance to procedural sedation risks.
METHODS
A protocolized search identified studies on GLP-1 RA that quantified gastric emptying measures. Pooled estimates using random effects were presented as weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Univariate meta-regression was performed to assess the influence of GLP-1 RA type, short- vs long-acting mechanism of action, and duration of treatment on gastric emptying.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies met inclusion criteria. Five studies (n=247) utilized scintigraphy (GES). Mean T1/2 was 138.4 minutes (CI:74.5-202.3) for GLP-1 RA versus 95.0 minutes (CI:54.9-135.0) for placebo, with pooled mean difference of 36.0 minutes (CI:17.0-55.0, p<0.01, I2=79.4%). Ten studies (n=411) utilized the acetaminophen absorption test (AAT), with no significant delay in gastric emptying measured by Tmax, AUC4hr, and AUC5hr with GLP-1 RA (p>0.05). On meta-regression, type of GLP-1 RA, mechanism of action, and treatment duration did not impact gastric emptying (p>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
While a gastric emptying delay of ∼36 minutes is quantifiable on GLP-1 RA medications, it is of limited magnitude relative to standard periprocedural fasting periods. There were no substantial differences in gastric emptying on modalities reflective of liquid emptying (AAT), particularly at time points relevant to periprocedural care.
引言 GLP-1 受体激动剂(GLP-1 RA)药物的围手术期管理建议因证据有限而存在分歧。我们进行了一项系统回顾和荟萃分析,以提供与体重减轻机制和 GLP-1 RA 围手术期管理相关的胃排空定量指标。我们假设胃排空延迟的程度较低,且对手术镇静风险的临床意义有限。方法通过协议检索确定了有关 GLP-1 RA 的量化胃排空测量的研究。使用随机效应的汇总估计值以加权平均差和 95% 置信区间 (CI) 表示。进行了单变量元回归,以评估 GLP-1 RA 类型、短效与长效作用机制以及治疗持续时间对胃排空的影响。五项研究(n=247)采用了闪烁成像(GES)。GLP-1 RA的平均T1/2为138.4分钟(CI:74.5-202.3),而安慰剂的平均T1/2为95.0分钟(CI:54.9-135.0),两者的平均差异为36.0分钟(CI:17.0-55.0,P0.05)。在元回归中,GLP-1 RA 的类型、作用机制和治疗持续时间均不影响胃排空(P>0.05)。结论虽然 GLP-1 RA 药物可量化胃排空延迟 36 分钟,但相对于标准的围手术期禁食时间而言,其幅度有限。反映液体排空的模式(AAT)在胃排空方面没有实质性差异,特别是在与围手术期护理相关的时间点。