| Title |
Are prophylactic anti-reflux medications effective after esophageal atresia repair? Systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pediatric Surgery International, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00383-018-4242-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hiromu Miyake, Yong Chen, Alison Hock, Shogo Seo, Yuhki Koike, Agostino Pierro |
| Abstract |
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. 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. 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. 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. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 16% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 20% |
| Unknown | 11 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 46% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 15 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 April 2018.
All research outputs
#12,951,747
of 23,031,582 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Surgery International
#420
of 1,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,896
of 333,594 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Surgery International
#7
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,031,582 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,267 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,594 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.