UEG and EAES rapid guideline: Update systematic review, network meta-analysis, CINeMA and GRADE assessment, and evidence-informed European recommendations on surgical management of GERD

Methods of quality assurance in multicenter trials in laparoscopic fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Operative performance may affect the internal and external validity of randomized trials. The aim of this study was to review the use of surgical quality assurance mechanisms of published trials on laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery, with the objective to appraise their internal (research quality) and external validity (applicability to the clinical setting).

METHODS

Building upon a previous systematic review and network meta-analysis published by the authors, Medline, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and OpenGrey databases were searched for randomized control trials comparing different methods of laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery for the management of gastroesophageal disease. Quality assurance in individual studies was appraised using a specified framework addressing surgeon accreditation, procedure standardization, and performance monitoring.

RESULTS

In total, 2276 articles were screened to obtain 43 publications reporting 29 randomized controlled trials. Twenty-five out of 43 (58.1%) articles reported the number of participating centers and surgeons involved. Additionally, only 21/43 (48.8%) of articles reported consistent use of a bougie, while 23/43 (53.5%) of articles reported consistent division of the short gastric arteries during fundoplication. Surgical experience and credentials were stated in half of the studies. Standardization of the technique was reported in almost 70% of cases, whereas operative notes or video was submitted in one fourth of the studies. Monitoring of the operative performance during the trial was not documented in most of the trials (62%).

CONCLUSION

Surgical quality assurance in randomized trials on laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery is insufficient, which does not allow appraisal of the internal and external validity of this research. With improved reporting, trials assessing the use of laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery will enable surgeons to make informed treatment decisions to enhance patient care in the surgical management of GERD.

Real-world evidence with magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a scoping review

Background

The burden of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is high, with up to 30% of the Western population reporting reflux-related symptoms with or without hiatal hernia. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is a standardized laparoscopic procedure for patients who are dissatisfied with medical therapy and for those with early-stage disease who would not usually be considered ideal candidates for fundoplication. The MSA device is manufactured in different sizes and is designed to augment the physiologic barrier to reflux by magnetic force.

Methods

An extensive scoping review was performed to provide a map of current evidence with respect to MSA, to identify gaps in knowledge, and to make recommendations for future research. All the authors contributed to the literature search in PubMed and Web of Science and contributed to summarizing the evidence.

Results

Magnetic sphincter augmentation, especially in combination with crural repair, is effective in reducing GERD symptoms, proton pump inhibitor use, and esophageal acid exposure, and in improving patients’ quality of life. Safety issues such as device erosion or migration have been rare and not associated with mortality. The MSA device can be removed laparoscopically if necessary, thereby preserving the option of fundoplication or other therapies in the future. Contraindication to scanning in high-power Tesla magnetic resonance systems remains a potential limitation of the MSA procedure. High-resolution manometry and functional lumen imaging probes appear to be promising tools to predict procedural outcomes by improving reflux control and reducing the incidence of dysphagia.

Conclusion

A consensus on acquisition and interpretation of high-resolution manometry and impedance planimetry data is needed to gain better understanding of physiology, to improve patient selection, and to pave the way for a personalized surgical approach in antireflux surgery.

UEG and EAES rapid guideline: Update systematic review, network meta-analysis, CINeMA and GRADE assessment, and evidence-informed European recommendations on surgical management of GERD

BACKGROUND

There are several options for the surgical management of GERD in adults. Previous guidelines and systematic reviews have compared the effects of total fundoplication versus pooled effects of different techniques of partial fundoplication.

OBJECTIVE

To develop evidence-informed, trustworthy, pertinent recommendations on the use of total, posterior partial and anterior partial fundoplications for the management of GERD in adults.

METHODS

We performed an update systematic review, network meta-analysis, and evidence appraisal using the GRADE and the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis methodologies. An international, multidisciplinary panel of surgeons, gastroenterologists, and a patient representative reached unanimous consensus through an evidence-to-decision framework to select among multiple interventions, and a Delphi process to formulate the recommendation. The project was developed in an online authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp), and was overseen by an external auditor.

RESULTS

We suggest posterior partial fundoplication over total posterior or anterior 90° fundoplication in adult patients with GERD. We suggest anterior >90° fundoplication as an alternative, although relevant comparative evidence is limited (weak recommendation). The guideline, with recommendations, evidence summaries and decision aids in user friendly formats can also be accessed in MAGICapp: https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/j20X4n.

CONCLUSION

This rapid guideline was developed in line with highest methodological standards and provides evidence-informed recommendations on the surgical management of GERD. It provides user-friendly decision aids to inform healthcare professionals' and patients' decision making.