Alexander T. Reddy, E. Song, R. Shimpi, S. Cantrell, D. Leiman
{"title":"无效食管动力的药物治疗:系统综述","authors":"Alexander T. Reddy, E. Song, R. Shimpi, S. Cantrell, D. Leiman","doi":"10.1177/26345161231168955","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is a commonly identified disorder of peristalsis. Although often asymptomatic, IEM can be associated with dysphagia. Aside from treating co-existing gastroesophageal reflux disease and sources of mechanical obstruction, few options are available for management in this context. We therefore systematically reviewed the literature to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for medical treatments of IEM. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched using controlled vocabulary and keywords to identify RCTs from inception through 9/22/2021. Prospective studies evaluating medical therapy to improve dysphagia in adults with IEM were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Among 1046 studies identified, 6 (0.58%) met inclusion criteria with a total of 65 patients. Most studies evaluated serotonin receptor agonists (buspirone, mosapride, prucalopride, and sumatriptan), primarily assessing changes on esophageal high-resolution manometry parameters, and only 1 study evaluated patient reported outcomes. Overall, medical therapy improved these pooled outcomes in 5 (83%) studies. Although treatment endpoints varied, the risk of bias in study reporting was low for 4 studies and uncertain for 2 studies. There are currently few therapeutic options available for IEM patients with symptomatic non-obstructive dysphagia. Our systematic review identified 6 studies utilizing medical therapy in patients with IEM, and a majority demonstrated an improvement in HRM parameters. Medical therapy may therefore be considered in this context, but additional studies are warranted to assess for similar improvement in patient symptoms.","PeriodicalId":73049,"journal":{"name":"Foregut (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medical Therapy for Ineffective Esophageal Motility: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Alexander T. Reddy, E. Song, R. Shimpi, S. Cantrell, D. Leiman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/26345161231168955\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is a commonly identified disorder of peristalsis. Although often asymptomatic, IEM can be associated with dysphagia. Aside from treating co-existing gastroesophageal reflux disease and sources of mechanical obstruction, few options are available for management in this context. We therefore systematically reviewed the literature to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for medical treatments of IEM. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched using controlled vocabulary and keywords to identify RCTs from inception through 9/22/2021. Prospective studies evaluating medical therapy to improve dysphagia in adults with IEM were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Among 1046 studies identified, 6 (0.58%) met inclusion criteria with a total of 65 patients. Most studies evaluated serotonin receptor agonists (buspirone, mosapride, prucalopride, and sumatriptan), primarily assessing changes on esophageal high-resolution manometry parameters, and only 1 study evaluated patient reported outcomes. Overall, medical therapy improved these pooled outcomes in 5 (83%) studies. Although treatment endpoints varied, the risk of bias in study reporting was low for 4 studies and uncertain for 2 studies. There are currently few therapeutic options available for IEM patients with symptomatic non-obstructive dysphagia. Our systematic review identified 6 studies utilizing medical therapy in patients with IEM, and a majority demonstrated an improvement in HRM parameters. Medical therapy may therefore be considered in this context, but additional studies are warranted to assess for similar improvement in patient symptoms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73049,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Foregut (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Foregut (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/26345161231168955\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foregut (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26345161231168955","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
无效的食道蠕动(IEM)是一种常见的蠕动障碍。尽管IEM通常无症状,但可能与吞咽困难有关。除了治疗同时存在的胃食管反流病和机械性梗阻外,在这种情况下,几乎没有可用的治疗方法。因此,我们系统地回顾了文献,以确定IEM药物治疗的随机对照试验(RCT)。MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane Library和Web of Science使用受控词汇和关键词进行搜索,以确定从开始到2021年9月22日的随机对照试验。前瞻性研究评估了药物治疗改善成人IEM吞咽困难的效果。使用修订的Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估偏倚风险。在确定的1046项研究中,6项(0.58%)符合纳入标准,共有65名患者。大多数研究评估了5-羟色胺受体激动剂(丁螺环酮、莫沙必利、普卡罗必利和舒马曲普坦),主要评估食道高分辨率测压参数的变化,只有1项研究评估了患者报告的结果。总体而言,在5项(83%)研究中,药物治疗改善了这些合并结果。尽管治疗终点各不相同,但4项研究的研究报告偏倚风险较低,2项研究的偏倚风险不确定。目前,对于有症状的非阻塞性吞咽困难的IEM患者,几乎没有可用的治疗方案。我们的系统综述确定了6项在IEM患者中使用药物治疗的研究,大多数研究表明HRM参数有所改善。因此,在这种情况下可以考虑药物治疗,但需要进行额外的研究来评估患者症状的类似改善。
Medical Therapy for Ineffective Esophageal Motility: A Systematic Review
Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is a commonly identified disorder of peristalsis. Although often asymptomatic, IEM can be associated with dysphagia. Aside from treating co-existing gastroesophageal reflux disease and sources of mechanical obstruction, few options are available for management in this context. We therefore systematically reviewed the literature to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for medical treatments of IEM. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched using controlled vocabulary and keywords to identify RCTs from inception through 9/22/2021. Prospective studies evaluating medical therapy to improve dysphagia in adults with IEM were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Among 1046 studies identified, 6 (0.58%) met inclusion criteria with a total of 65 patients. Most studies evaluated serotonin receptor agonists (buspirone, mosapride, prucalopride, and sumatriptan), primarily assessing changes on esophageal high-resolution manometry parameters, and only 1 study evaluated patient reported outcomes. Overall, medical therapy improved these pooled outcomes in 5 (83%) studies. Although treatment endpoints varied, the risk of bias in study reporting was low for 4 studies and uncertain for 2 studies. There are currently few therapeutic options available for IEM patients with symptomatic non-obstructive dysphagia. Our systematic review identified 6 studies utilizing medical therapy in patients with IEM, and a majority demonstrated an improvement in HRM parameters. Medical therapy may therefore be considered in this context, but additional studies are warranted to assess for similar improvement in patient symptoms.