胃内球囊治疗肥胖:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2.3 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Endoscopy International Open Pub Date : 2025-09-03 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1055/a-2681-2859
Gabriel de Oliveira Amaral, João Pedro Schmitt, Lucas Monteiro Delgado, Gilmara Coelho Meine
{"title":"胃内球囊治疗肥胖:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Gabriel de Oliveira Amaral, João Pedro Schmitt, Lucas Monteiro Delgado, Gilmara Coelho Meine","doi":"10.1055/a-2681-2859","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Intragastric balloon (IGB) is a minimally invasive and reversible endoscopic option for treating obesity. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of IGB versus standard medical therapy (SMT) for obesity management, including studies with a minimum treatment duration of 6 months. Subgroup analyses were performed based on IGB type, baseline mean body mass index (BMI), and use of pharmacological therapy in the SMT group.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Outcomes were evaluated at 6, 9, and 12 months after initiation of treatment. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 15 RCTs (1961 patients). Compared with SMT, IGB significantly improved the percentage of excess weight loss at 6 months (MD 16.80; 95% CI 9.22-24.38), 9 months (MD 14.36; 95% CI 7.67-21.04), and 12 months (MD 13.10; 95% CI 10.43-15.77). IGB also showed superior results in percentage of total weight loss, absolute weight loss, and BMI reduction at all time points compared with SMT. There were significant subgroup differences for some outcomes according to IGB type and baseline mean BMI.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In obese adults, IGB is more effective than SMT for weight loss at 6, 9, and 12 months.</p>","PeriodicalId":11671,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopy International Open","volume":"13 ","pages":"a26812859"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12417771/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intragastric balloon for obesity treatment: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.\",\"authors\":\"Gabriel de Oliveira Amaral, João Pedro Schmitt, Lucas Monteiro Delgado, Gilmara Coelho Meine\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2681-2859\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Intragastric balloon (IGB) is a minimally invasive and reversible endoscopic option for treating obesity. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of IGB versus standard medical therapy (SMT) for obesity management, including studies with a minimum treatment duration of 6 months. Subgroup analyses were performed based on IGB type, baseline mean body mass index (BMI), and use of pharmacological therapy in the SMT group.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Outcomes were evaluated at 6, 9, and 12 months after initiation of treatment. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 15 RCTs (1961 patients). Compared with SMT, IGB significantly improved the percentage of excess weight loss at 6 months (MD 16.80; 95% CI 9.22-24.38), 9 months (MD 14.36; 95% CI 7.67-21.04), and 12 months (MD 13.10; 95% CI 10.43-15.77). IGB also showed superior results in percentage of total weight loss, absolute weight loss, and BMI reduction at all time points compared with SMT. There were significant subgroup differences for some outcomes according to IGB type and baseline mean BMI.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In obese adults, IGB is more effective than SMT for weight loss at 6, 9, and 12 months.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11671,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endoscopy International Open\",\"volume\":\"13 \",\"pages\":\"a26812859\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12417771/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endoscopy International Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2681-2859\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopy International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2681-2859","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和研究目的:胃内球囊(IGB)是一种微创、可逆的内窥镜治疗肥胖的方法。本系统综述和荟萃分析比较了IGB与标准药物治疗(SMT)在肥胖管理方面的有效性,包括最低治疗持续时间为6个月的研究。根据IGB类型、基线平均体重指数(BMI)和SMT组的药物治疗使用情况进行亚组分析。方法:我们在MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆数据库中检索随机对照试验(RCTs)。在开始治疗后6、9和12个月评估结果。采用随机效应模型计算连续结果的合并平均差(MD), 95%置信区间(CI)。结果:我们纳入15项随机对照试验(1961例)。与SMT相比,IGB在6个月(MD 16.80; 95% CI 9.22-24.38)、9个月(MD 14.36; 95% CI 7.67-21.04)和12个月(MD 13.10; 95% CI 10.43-15.77)时显著提高了超重减重的百分比。与SMT相比,IGB在所有时间点的总体重减轻百分比、绝对体重减轻百分比和BMI降低方面也显示出更好的结果。根据IGB类型和基线平均BMI,某些结果存在显著的亚组差异。结论:在肥胖成人中,IGB在6、9和12个月时比SMT更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Intragastric balloon for obesity treatment: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Intragastric balloon for obesity treatment: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Intragastric balloon for obesity treatment: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Intragastric balloon for obesity treatment: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background and study aims: Intragastric balloon (IGB) is a minimally invasive and reversible endoscopic option for treating obesity. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of IGB versus standard medical therapy (SMT) for obesity management, including studies with a minimum treatment duration of 6 months. Subgroup analyses were performed based on IGB type, baseline mean body mass index (BMI), and use of pharmacological therapy in the SMT group.

Methods: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Outcomes were evaluated at 6, 9, and 12 months after initiation of treatment. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous outcomes.

Results: We included 15 RCTs (1961 patients). Compared with SMT, IGB significantly improved the percentage of excess weight loss at 6 months (MD 16.80; 95% CI 9.22-24.38), 9 months (MD 14.36; 95% CI 7.67-21.04), and 12 months (MD 13.10; 95% CI 10.43-15.77). IGB also showed superior results in percentage of total weight loss, absolute weight loss, and BMI reduction at all time points compared with SMT. There were significant subgroup differences for some outcomes according to IGB type and baseline mean BMI.

Conclusions: In obese adults, IGB is more effective than SMT for weight loss at 6, 9, and 12 months.

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
Endoscopy International Open
Endoscopy International Open GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
3.80%
发文量
270
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信