比较胃窦前血管异位症的内窥镜治疗方法:网络 Meta 分析中的疗效、安全性和结果。

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Journal of clinical gastroenterology Pub Date : 2024-09-04 DOI:10.1097/MCG.0000000000002057
Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Hossein Haghbin, Fariha Hasan, Julia Dillard, Fouad Jaber, Dushyant Singh Dahiya, Hassam Ali, Faisal Kamal, Umar Hayat, Wade Lee-Smith, Amir Sohail, Sumant Inamdar, Muhammad Aziz, Douglas G Adler
{"title":"比较胃窦前血管异位症的内窥镜治疗方法:网络 Meta 分析中的疗效、安全性和结果。","authors":"Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Hossein Haghbin, Fariha Hasan, Julia Dillard, Fouad Jaber, Dushyant Singh Dahiya, Hassam Ali, Faisal Kamal, Umar Hayat, Wade Lee-Smith, Amir Sohail, Sumant Inamdar, Muhammad Aziz, Douglas G Adler","doi":"10.1097/MCG.0000000000002057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) is characterized by vascular ectasias accounting for 4% of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeds, which can range from occult bleeds to severe acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. In turn, GAVE can lead to severe morbidity and recurrent hospitalization. Current endoscopic treatments for GAVE include argon plasma coagulation (APC), endoscopic band ligation (EBL), and radiofrequency ablation. With this significant burden in mind, a systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of various modalities in the treatment of GAVE.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All studies that involved adults and children with endoscopic characteristics of GAVE undergoing treatment with APC, EBL, radiofrequency ablation, or a combination of 2 treatment modalities were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no statistical difference in the rate of adverse events and the number of red blood cell transfusions across all 3 groups (APC, EBL, and APC + EBL). However, statistical differences were noted for outcomes of bleeding recurrence, length of hospitalization, and change in hemoglobin status. EBL exhibited a significant decrease in bleeding recurrence when compared with APC. Moreover, shorter hospitalization stays were seen in APC + EBL and EBL groups compared with APC, and a beneficial change in hemoglobin status was also more often seen in APC + EBL and EBL groups compared with APC.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on this study, EBL was found to have superior efficacy when compared with APC for the treatment of GAVE; however, there was no significant difference in rates of adverse events between APC, EBL, and combination therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":15457,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Endoscopic Treatment Modalities for Gastric Antral Vascular Ectasia: Efficacy, Safety, and Outcomes in a Network Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Hossein Haghbin, Fariha Hasan, Julia Dillard, Fouad Jaber, Dushyant Singh Dahiya, Hassam Ali, Faisal Kamal, Umar Hayat, Wade Lee-Smith, Amir Sohail, Sumant Inamdar, Muhammad Aziz, Douglas G Adler\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCG.0000000000002057\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) is characterized by vascular ectasias accounting for 4% of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeds, which can range from occult bleeds to severe acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. In turn, GAVE can lead to severe morbidity and recurrent hospitalization. Current endoscopic treatments for GAVE include argon plasma coagulation (APC), endoscopic band ligation (EBL), and radiofrequency ablation. With this significant burden in mind, a systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of various modalities in the treatment of GAVE.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All studies that involved adults and children with endoscopic characteristics of GAVE undergoing treatment with APC, EBL, radiofrequency ablation, or a combination of 2 treatment modalities were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no statistical difference in the rate of adverse events and the number of red blood cell transfusions across all 3 groups (APC, EBL, and APC + EBL). However, statistical differences were noted for outcomes of bleeding recurrence, length of hospitalization, and change in hemoglobin status. EBL exhibited a significant decrease in bleeding recurrence when compared with APC. Moreover, shorter hospitalization stays were seen in APC + EBL and EBL groups compared with APC, and a beneficial change in hemoglobin status was also more often seen in APC + EBL and EBL groups compared with APC.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on this study, EBL was found to have superior efficacy when compared with APC for the treatment of GAVE; however, there was no significant difference in rates of adverse events between APC, EBL, and combination therapy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000002057\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000002057","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:胃前庭血管异位症(GAVE)的特点是血管异位,占非静脉曲张性上消化道出血的 4%,出血范围从隐性出血到严重的急性上消化道出血。反过来,GAVE 可导致严重的发病率和反复住院。目前针对 GAVE 的内镜治疗方法包括氩等离子凝固术(APC)、内镜带结扎术(EBL)和射频消融术。考虑到这一重大负担,我们进行了一项系统性综述和网络荟萃分析,以比较各种方法治疗 GAVE 的有效性和安全性:方法:纳入所有涉及成人和儿童、具有内镜特征的 GAVE、接受 APC、EBL、射频消融或两种治疗方式联合治疗的研究:所有 3 组(APC、EBL 和 APC + EBL)的不良事件发生率和输红细胞次数均无统计学差异。但是,在出血复发、住院时间和血红蛋白状态变化等结果方面存在统计学差异。与 APC 相比,EBL 能显著降低出血复发率。此外,与 APC 相比,APC + EBL 组和 EBL 组的住院时间更短,而与 APC 相比,APC + EBL 组和 EBL 组的血红蛋白状况也更经常出现有益的变化:结论:根据这项研究,EBL 在治疗 GAVE 方面的疗效优于 APC;但是,APC、EBL 和联合疗法之间的不良反应发生率没有显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparing Endoscopic Treatment Modalities for Gastric Antral Vascular Ectasia: Efficacy, Safety, and Outcomes in a Network Meta-analysis.

Objective: Gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) is characterized by vascular ectasias accounting for 4% of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeds, which can range from occult bleeds to severe acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. In turn, GAVE can lead to severe morbidity and recurrent hospitalization. Current endoscopic treatments for GAVE include argon plasma coagulation (APC), endoscopic band ligation (EBL), and radiofrequency ablation. With this significant burden in mind, a systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of various modalities in the treatment of GAVE.

Methods: All studies that involved adults and children with endoscopic characteristics of GAVE undergoing treatment with APC, EBL, radiofrequency ablation, or a combination of 2 treatment modalities were included.

Results: There was no statistical difference in the rate of adverse events and the number of red blood cell transfusions across all 3 groups (APC, EBL, and APC + EBL). However, statistical differences were noted for outcomes of bleeding recurrence, length of hospitalization, and change in hemoglobin status. EBL exhibited a significant decrease in bleeding recurrence when compared with APC. Moreover, shorter hospitalization stays were seen in APC + EBL and EBL groups compared with APC, and a beneficial change in hemoglobin status was also more often seen in APC + EBL and EBL groups compared with APC.

Conclusions: Based on this study, EBL was found to have superior efficacy when compared with APC for the treatment of GAVE; however, there was no significant difference in rates of adverse events between APC, EBL, and combination therapy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of clinical gastroenterology
Journal of clinical gastroenterology 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
3.40%
发文量
339
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology gathers the world''s latest, most relevant clinical studies and reviews, case reports, and technical expertise in a single source. Regular features include cutting-edge, peer-reviewed articles and clinical reviews that put the latest research and development into the context of your practice. Also included are biographies, focused organ reviews, practice management, and therapeutic recommendations.
期刊最新文献
Clinical Impact of High-dose Esomeprazole-amoxicillin Dual Therapy as Rescue Treatment for Helicobacter pylori Infection: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Trial. Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Liver Cirrhosis. Prevalence and Pathophysiology of Loose Stools and Their Impact on Clinical Severity and Quality of Life in Women With Fecal Incontinence. Brain Fog in Gastrointestinal Disorders: Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth, Gastroparesis, Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Strategies, Technologies, and Tips for Successful Cecal Intubation.
×
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