SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2023
Efficacy and safety of gastric per-oral endoscopic myotomy (GPOEM) in lung transplant patients with refractory gastroparesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gastric Motility Disorders Post Organ Transplantation-A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Current Concepts in Gastroparesis and Gastric Neuromuscular Disorders-Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Management.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Precision Endoscopy in Peroral Myotomies for Motility Disorders of the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract: Current Insights and Prospective Avenues-A Comprehensive Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPost-lung transplant gastroparesis is a frequent debilitating complication of lung transplant recipients, as it can increase the risk for gastro-esophageal reflux disease and subsequent graft dysfunction. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of GPOEM in lung transplant patients with refractory gastroparesis.
methodsThe present systematic review and meta-analysis wer performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We selected studies that analyzed the gastroparesis cardinal symptom index (GCSI) before and after the procedure to verify the efficacy of GPOEM. Random-effects model was used and the analysis was performed with STATA 17.
resultsFour observational studies (one conference abstract) with 104 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Prior treatments for gastroparesis included prokinetic agents and botulinum toxin in 78% (78/104) and 66.7% (66/99), respectively. Pooled estimate for clinical efficacy of GPOEM was 83% (95% CI 76%-90%). The pooled mean reduction in GCSI following the procedure was - 2.01 (- 2.35, - 1.65, p = 0.014). Three studies reported statistically significant improvement of gastro-esophageal retention or emptying in the post-GPOEM period. 30-day post-operative complications included minor or major bleeding (11.6%), severe reflux (1.2%), and pyloric stenosis (1.2%) requiring re-intervention. 90-day all-cause mortality was 2.6% with one patient dying from severe allograft rejection.
conclusionOur study showed that GPOEM is an effective and safe strategy for lung transplant patients with refractory gastroparesis and should be considered as a therapeutic strategy in this population. Larger multicenter trials are needed in the future to further evaluate the effect of GPOEM on allograft function and rates of rejection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.