-
Przeglad Gastroenterologiczny 2022Vonoprazan has been found to promote a better antisecretory effect addressing acid-related diseases' unmet needs. (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Vonoprazan has been found to promote a better antisecretory effect addressing acid-related diseases' unmet needs.
AIM
To assess if vonoprazan effectively treats patients diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux disease esophagitis or with peptic ulcers induced by chronic use of aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A literature search was conducted (April/2021) using Medline via PubMed, Cochrane library, Lilacs, Scielo, and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination electronic databases.
RESULTS
We retrieved 55 titles. Of these, 13 met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. Of these 13 articles, 4 were prospective cohort studies, 1 was a follow-up analysis of a preceding prospective study, 1 was a retrospective cohort study, and 6 were randomized clinical trials.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings suggest that vonoprazan was effective and non-inferior to proton pump inhibitors in healing and maintaining healed reflux oesophagitis, leading to faster symptom relief. Vonoprazan may also be considered for preventing aspirin- or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related peptic ulcer recurrence.
PubMed: 36127938
DOI: 10.5114/pg.2021.111401 -
BMC Cancer Jan 2024The optimal reconstruction method after proximal gastrectomy remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the short-term outcomes and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The optimal reconstruction method after proximal gastrectomy remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the short-term outcomes and long-term quality of life of various reconstruction methods.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched to identify comparative studies concerning the reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy. The reconstruction methods were classified into six groups: double tract reconstruction (DTR), esophagogastrostomy (EG), gastric tube reconstruction (GT), jejunal interposition (JI), jejunal pouch interposition (JPI) and double flap technique (DFT). Esophagogastric anastomosis group (EG group) included EG, GT and DFT, while esophagojejunal anastomosis group (EJ group) included DTR, JI and JPI.
RESULTS
A total of 27 studies with 2410 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results indicated that the incidences of reflux esophagitis of DTR, EG, GT, JI, JPI and DFT were 7.6%, 27.3%, 4.5%, 7.1%, 14.0%, and 9.1%, respectively. The EG group had more reflux esophagitis (OR = 3.68, 95%CI 2.44-5.57, P < 0.00001) and anastomotic stricture (OR = 1.58, 95%CI 1.02-2.45, P = 0.04) than the EJ group. But the EG group showed shorter operation time (MD=-56.34, 95%CI -76.75- -35.94, P < 0.00001), lesser intraoperative blood loss (MD=-126.52, 95%CI -187.91- -65.12, P < 0.0001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (MD=-2.07, 95%CI -3.66- -0.48, P = 0.01). Meanwhile, the EG group had fewer postoperative complications (OR = 0.68, 95%CI 0.51-0.90, P = 0.006) and lesser weight loss (MD=-1.25, 95%CI -2.11- -0.39, P = 0.004). For specific reconstruction methods, there were lesser reflux esophagitis (OR = 0.10, 95%CI 0.06-0.18, P < 0.00001) and anastomotic stricture (OR = 0.14, 95%CI 0.06-0.33, P < 0.00001) in DTR than the esophagogastrostomy. DTR and esophagogastrostomy showed no significant difference in anastomotic leakage (OR = 1.01, 95%CI 0.34-3.01, P = 0.98).
CONCLUSION
Esophagojejunal anastomosis after proximal gastrectomy can reduce the incidences of reflux esophagitis and anastomotic stricture, while esophagogastric anastomosis has advantages in technical simplicity and long-term weight status. Double tract reconstruction is a safe technique with excellent anti-reflux effectiveness and favorable quality of life.
REGISTRATION
This meta-analysis was registered on the PROSPERO (CRD42022381357).
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Constriction, Pathologic; Esophagitis, Peptic; Gastrectomy; Anastomosis, Surgical
PubMed: 38200411
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-11827-4 -
Clinical Otolaryngology : Official... Jul 2023To investigate the association between laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and recalcitrant chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the association between laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and recalcitrant chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Cochrane Library and Scopus.
REVIEW METHODS
Three investigators searched the specified databases for studies investigating the relationship between LPR, GERD and recalcitrant CRS with or without polyposis. The following outcomes were investigated with PRISMA criteria: age; gender; reflux and CRS diagnosis; association outcomes and potential treatment outcomes. The authors performed a bias analysis of papers and provided recommendations for future studies.
RESULTS
A total of 17 studies investigated the association between reflux and recalcitrant CRS. According to pharyngeal pH monitoring, 54% of patients with recalcitrant CRS reported hypo or nasopharyngeal acid reflux events. The number of hypo- and nasopharyngeal acid reflux events was significantly higher in patients compared to healthy individuals in 4 and 2 studies, respectively. Only one study did not report intergroup differences. The proportion of GERD was significantly higher in CRS patients compared to controls, with a prevalence ranging from 32% to 91% of cases. No author considered nonacid reflux events. There was significant heterogeneity in the inclusion criteria; definition of reflux and association outcomes, limiting the ability to draw clear conclusions. Pepsin was found in sinonasal secretions more frequently in CRS patients than controls.
CONCLUSION
Laryngopharyngeal reflux and GERD may be contributing factors of CRS therapeutic resistance, but future studies are needed to confirm the association considering nonacid reflux events.
Topics: Humans; Laryngopharyngeal Reflux; Esophagitis, Peptic; Pepsin A; Sinusitis
PubMed: 36895147
DOI: 10.1111/coa.14047 -
PloS One 2017To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing the gastric-tube vs. whole-stomach for esophageal cancer in order to determine the optimal surgical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing the gastric-tube vs. whole-stomach for esophageal cancer in order to determine the optimal surgical technique of esophagectomy.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, ScienceDirect, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Clinical trials that compared the gastric-tube versus whole-stomach for esophageal cancer were selected. The clinical endpoints included anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stenosis, reflux esophagitis, pneumonia, delayed gastric emptying, and thoracic stomach syndrome.
RESULTS
A total of 6 articles (1571 patients) were included. Compared to the whole-stomach approach, the gastric-tube approach was associated with a lower incidence of reflux esophagitis (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.16 to 0.81, p = 0.01) and thoracic stomach syndrome (95% CI: 0.17 to 0.55, p < 0.0001). The rates of anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stenosis, pneumonia, and delayed gastric emptying did not significantly differ between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The gastric-tube esophagectomy is superior to the whole-stomach approach, as it is associated with a lower incidence of postoperative reflux esophagitis and thoracic stomach syndrome. Our findings must be validated in large-scale randomized controlled trials.
Topics: Anastomotic Leak; Esophageal Neoplasms; Esophagectomy; Esophagitis, Peptic; Humans; Pneumonia; Publication Bias
PubMed: 28267808
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173416 -
Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology Mar 2023Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is an established treatment for achalasia. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to analyze the mid and long-term... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is an established treatment for achalasia. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to analyze the mid and long-term outcomes of POEM in esophageal motility disorders.
METHODS
Literature search was performed in databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane databases, and Google scholar from January 2010 to May 2021. The primary objective of the study was the clinical success (Eckardt score ≤3 or <4) at mid-term (30 to 60 mo) and long-term (>60 mo) follow-up after POEM. Secondary objectives included post-POEM gastroesophageal reflux (GER) as evaluated by symptoms, increased esophageal acid exposure, and reflux esophagitis.
RESULTS
Seventeen studies with 3591 patients were included in the review. Subtypes of motility disorders were type I (27%), type II (54.5%), type III (10.7%), distal esophageal spasm/Jackhammer esophagus (2%), and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (17.5%). Pooled mean follow-up duration was 48.9 months (95% CI, 40.02-57.75). Pooled rate of clinical success at mid-term follow-up was 87% (95% CI, 81-91; I2 , 86%) and long-term was 84% (95% CI, 76-89; I2 , 47%). In nonachalasia motility disorders (esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction, distal esophageal spasm, and Jackhammer esophagus), pooled rate of clinical success was 77% (95% CI, 65-85; I2 , 0%). GER as estimated by symptoms was 23% (95% CI, 19-27; I2 , 74%), erosive esophagitis was 27% (95% CI, 18-38%; I2 , 91%), and increased esophageal acid exposure was 41% (95% CI, 30-52; I2 , 88%).
CONCLUSION
POEM is a durable treatment option in cases with achalasia. One-fourth of patients suffer from erosive GER in the long-term and success rates are lower in nonachalasia esophageal motility disorders.
Topics: Humans; Esophageal Achalasia; Esophageal Spasm, Diffuse; Treatment Outcome; Esophageal Motility Disorders; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Esophagitis, Peptic; Myotomy; Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery; Esophageal Sphincter, Lower; Esophagoscopy
PubMed: 36227028
DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001776 -
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics Sep 2021The prevalence of duodenogastroesophageal reflux (DGER) and its effect on symptoms and oesophageal lesions in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is unclear. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The prevalence of duodenogastroesophageal reflux (DGER) and its effect on symptoms and oesophageal lesions in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is unclear.
AIMS
To conduct a systematic review to determine the prevalence of DGER among patients with GERD, the effect of DGER on symptoms and oesophageal lesions, and the treatment of DGER.
METHODS
We searched Pubmed and MEDLINE for full text, English language articles until October 2020 that evaluated DGER prevalence among patients with GERD, the effect of DGER on symptoms and oesophageal lesions, and the treatment of DGER.
RESULTS
We identified 3891 reports and included 35 which analysed DGER prevalence in GERD, 15 which evaluated its effect in non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), 17 on erosive oesophagitis, 23 in Barrett's, and 13 which evaluated the treatment of DGER. The prevalence of DGER, when evaluated by Bilitec, among all GERD patients ranged from 10% to 97%, in NERD 10%-63%, in erosive oesophagitis 22%-80% and in Barrett's 50%-100%. There were no differences in the presence or degree of DGER among patients who were asymptomatic or symptomatic on proton pump inhibitors (PPI). The most commonly evaluated treatments for DGER were PPIs and DGER reduced post-PPI therapy in all studies.
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of DGER increased with more advanced oesophageal lesions and did not explain persisting symptoms among patients taking PPI therapy. PPIs appear to be effective in the treatment of DGER. DGER remains an important consideration in patients with GERD and future therapies deserve more study.
Topics: Duodenogastric Reflux; Esophagitis, Peptic; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Humans; Prevalence; Proton Pump Inhibitors
PubMed: 34313333
DOI: 10.1111/apt.16533 -
Clinical Gastroenterology and... Jul 2023The prevalence of clinically significant endoscopic findings in people with dyspepsia and understanding how symptoms can predict endoscopic pathology can help inform... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
The prevalence of clinically significant endoscopic findings in people with dyspepsia and understanding how symptoms can predict endoscopic pathology can help inform dyspepsia guidelines. We evaluated this in an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 2010 through to January 2022 to identify relevant articles. Eligible studies enrolled adults from the community, workplace, blood donation or screening clinics, family physician offices, or internal medicine clinics. Studies were required to report prevalence of dyspepsia and perform esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). Prevalence of clinically significant endoscopic findings in subjects with and without dyspepsia was pooled for all studies and compared using odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The data were pooled with those of the 9 studies included in the prior review.
RESULTS
Of 511 papers evaluated, 184 reported prevalence of dyspepsia. Fifteen reported prevalence of endoscopic findings among 41,763 participants (40.4% with dyspepsia). Erosive esophagitis was the most common abnormality (pooled prevalence, 11.0%; 95% CI, 8.9%-13.2%) followed by peptic ulcer (pooled prevalence, 4.4%; 95% CI, 2.5%-6.7%). The only finding encountered more frequently in individuals with dyspepsia, compared with those without, was peptic ulcer (odds ratio, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.08-2.39). More than 85% of EGDs were completely normal. Gastroesophageal cancer was rare (<0.4%) and equally prevalent among those with and without dyspepsia.
CONCLUSIONS
Erosive esophagitis was the most common clinically significant finding at EGD, whereas gastroesophageal cancers were rare. Most pathology, including esophagitis and cancer, were found in similar proportions in both groups. These findings support noninvasive approaches to managing dyspepsia in the community, with EGD reserved for those at high risk of malignancy.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Dyspepsia; Prevalence; Peptic Ulcer; Esophagitis; Stomach Neoplasms; Esophageal Neoplasms
PubMed: 35738355
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2022.05.041 -
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and... Aug 2015Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are one of the most widely used classes of drugs. However, the quantum clinical benefit of newer and more expensive PPIs over the older... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE
Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are one of the most widely used classes of drugs. However, the quantum clinical benefit of newer and more expensive PPIs over the older generation PPIs remains uncertain. This meta-analysis sought to assess the clinical and safety profiles of esomeprazole versus omeprazole at pharmacologically equivalent doses in healing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), peptic ulcer disease and eradicating Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection.
METHODS
PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing esomeprazole with omeprazole at all doses up to February 2015. Trials were assessed by two reviewers for eligibility according to predefined study inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model, and heterogeneity in the estimated effects was investigated using meta-regression. Sensitivity analysis was performed to test the robustness of the findings.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Fifteen trials were included and none of which compared esomeprazole with omeprazole in peptic ulcer disease. The included studies had not evaluated esomeprazole 20 mg versus omeprazole 40 mg. In GERD, esomeprazole 40 mg (relative risk (RR) = 1·07; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1·02 to 1·12) and 20 mg (RR=1·04; 95% CI 1·01 to 1·08) significantly improved esophagitis healing when compared with omeprazole 20 mg at week 8. The corresponding numbers needed to treat were 17 and 30, respectively. No significant difference was observed between esomeprazole 20 mg and omeprazole 20 mg at week 4. In H. pylori eradication, there was no difference in the treatment effects between esomeprazole 20 mg and omeprazole 20 mg (RR = 1·01;95% CI 0·96 to 1·05). Their safety profiles were comparable.
WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION
Esomeprazole demonstrated better esophagitis healing rate in patients with GERD than omeprazole at week 8. However, this clinical advantage diminished when both drugs were given at the same doses at week 4. Superiority of esomeprazole was not observed in the H. pylori eradication rates.
Topics: Esomeprazole; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Omeprazole; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25893507
DOI: 10.1111/jcpt.12277 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2017Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a class of medications that reduce acid secretion and are used for treating many conditions such as gastroesophageal reflux disease... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a class of medications that reduce acid secretion and are used for treating many conditions such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), dyspepsia, reflux esophagitis, peptic ulcer disease, and hypersecretory conditions (e.g. Zollinger-Ellison syndrome), and as part of the eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori bacteria. However, approximately 25% to 70% of people are prescribed a PPI inappropriately. Chronic PPI use without reassessment contributes to polypharmacy and puts people at risk of experiencing drug interactions and adverse events (e.g. Clostridium difficile infection, pneumonia, hypomagnesaemia, and fractures).
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects (benefits and harms) associated with deprescribing long-term PPI therapy in adults, compared to chronic daily use (28 days or greater).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 10), MEDLINE, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP). The last date of search was November 2016. We handsearched the reference lists of relevant studies. We screened 2357 articles (2317 identified through search strategy, 40 through other resources). Of these articles, we assessed 89 for eligibility.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized trials comparing at least one deprescribing modality (e.g. stopping PPI or reducing PPI) with a control consisting of no change in continuous daily PPI use in adult chronic users. Outcomes of interest were: change in gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, drug burden/PPI use, cost/resource use, negative and positive drug withdrawal events, and participant satisfaction.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently reviewed and extracted data and completed the risk of bias assessment. A third review author independently confirmed risk of bias assessment. We used Review Manager 5 software for data analysis. We contacted study authors if there was missing information.
MAIN RESULTS
The review included six trials (n = 1758). Trial participants were aged 48 to 57 years, except for one trial that had a mean age of 73 years. All participants were from the outpatient setting and had either nonerosive reflux disease or milder grades of esophagitis (LA grade A or B). Five trials investigated on-demand deprescribing and one trial examined abrupt discontinuation. There was low quality evidence that on-demand use of PPI may increase risk of 'lack of symptom control' compared with continuous PPI use (risk ratio (RR) 1.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31 to 2.21), thereby favoring continuous PPI use (five trials, n = 1653). There was a clinically significant reduction in 'drug burden', measured as PPI pill use per week with on-demand therapy (mean difference (MD) -3.79, 95% CI -4.73 to -2.84), favoring deprescribing based on moderate quality evidence (four trials, n = 1152). There was also low quality evidence that on-demand PPI use may be associated with reduced participant satisfaction compared with continuous PPI use. None of the included studies reported cost/resource use or positive drug withdrawal effects.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In people with mild GERD, on-demand deprescribing may lead to an increase in GI symptoms (e.g. dyspepsia, regurgitation) and probably a reduction in pill burden. There was a decline in participant satisfaction, although heterogeneity was high. There were insufficient data to make a conclusion regarding long-term benefits and harms of PPI discontinuation, although two trials (one on-demand trial and one abrupt discontinuation trial) reported endoscopic findings in their intervention groups at study end.
Topics: Aged; Deprescriptions; Esophagitis; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Humans; Inappropriate Prescribing; Middle Aged; Patient Satisfaction; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Withholding Treatment
PubMed: 28301676
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011969.pub2 -
Journal of Gastroenterology and... Sep 2016Upper gastrointestinal endoscopic findings, such as esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, peptic ulcer, and malignancy, represent a public health problem. This systematic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Upper gastrointestinal endoscopic findings, such as esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, peptic ulcer, and malignancy, represent a public health problem. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the prevalence of upper gastrointestinal endoscopic findings in the community.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in PUBMED and EMBASE to May 2015. Studies were eligible if they reported the prevalence of upper gastrointestinal endoscopic findings in unselected samples of the community.
RESULTS
Twelve articles were eligible, nine reported data from three endoscopic surveys (n = 3063 subjects), and three from national screening programs (n = 84 153). The overall prevalence of upper gastrointestinal endoscopic findings in the community was 30% in the Kalixanda study (Sweden), 24.9% in the Loiano-Monghidoro study (Italy), and 68.9% in the Systematic Investigation of Gastrointestinal Diseases study (China). The pooled prevalence of esophagitis, endoscopically suspected esophageal metaplasia (ESEM), peptic ulcer, and gastric cancer in all studies was 11.2, 5.1, 6.8, and 0.33%, respectively. The most frequent finding was esophagitis in Europe, with a prevalence of 15.5% in Sweden and 11.8% in Italy, and peptic ulcer in China (17.1%), both in asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals. The prevalence of Helicobacter pylori was positively associated with the prevalence of peptic ulcer (r = 0.91) but negatively associated with the prevalence of both esophagitis (r = -0.99) and ESEM (r = -0.95).
CONCLUSIONS
Upper gastrointestinal endoscopic findings are present in at least a quarter of subjects in the community with different patterns in Western and Eastern countries, both in asymptomatic and symptomatic subjects. H. pylori prevalence negatively impacts on the prevalence of reflux-related esophageal findings.
Topics: Barrett Esophagus; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Peptic Ulcer; Prevalence; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 26840528
DOI: 10.1111/jgh.13308