We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
Are prophylactic anti-reflux medications effective after esophageal atresia repair? Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Pediatric Surgery International 2018 May
PURPOSE: Gastroesophageal reflux after surgical repair of esophageal atresia (EA) can be associated with complications, such as esophageal stricture. Recent guidelines recommend prophylactic anti-reflux medication (PARM) after EA repair. However, the effectiveness of PARM is still unclear. The aim of this study was to review evidence surrounding the use of PARM in children operated for EA.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Databases from inception until the end of 2016 for comparative studies of PARM versus no PARM (control). Primary outcome was postoperative esophageal stricture. Quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE system.
RESULTS: We identified four observational studies that focused on esophageal stricture as an outcome. A total of 362 patients were included in meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in esophageal stricture rates between PARM and control (OR = 1.14; 95% CI = 0.61-2.13; p = 0.68; I2 = 38%). The quality of the evidence was very low, due to lack of precision as a consequence of small study sizes.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that PARM does not reduce the incidence of esophageal stricture after EA repair. Future well-controlled prospective studies are needed to obtain higher quality evidence.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Databases from inception until the end of 2016 for comparative studies of PARM versus no PARM (control). Primary outcome was postoperative esophageal stricture. Quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE system.
RESULTS: We identified four observational studies that focused on esophageal stricture as an outcome. A total of 362 patients were included in meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in esophageal stricture rates between PARM and control (OR = 1.14; 95% CI = 0.61-2.13; p = 0.68; I2 = 38%). The quality of the evidence was very low, due to lack of precision as a consequence of small study sizes.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that PARM does not reduce the incidence of esophageal stricture after EA repair. Future well-controlled prospective studies are needed to obtain higher quality evidence.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app