Efficacy and safety of endoscopic gastroplasty for treatment of obesity: An overview of comparative meta-analyses

Table 3 The effect of endoscopic gastroplasty vs other interventions on total body weight loss

Ref.	Country	Number of studies & participants	Intervention and comparator	Effect measure	Effect size (95%CI)	Interpretation with respect to intervention
3 months
Brunaldi et al[14], 2018	Brazil	8 studies; 320 participants	FTS-APC vs FTS-alone	% mean	FTS-APC: 25.0 ± 1.99; FTS-alone: 15.3 ± 9.88	The FTS-APC group and demonstrated significantly a greater weight loss compared to FTS alone (P < 0.001)
Jaruvongvanich et al[11], 2020	United States	2 studies	ft-TORe vs APMC-TORe	% mean difference	-0.1 (-4.6 to 4.4)	There was no significant difference between two treatments
Jaruvongvanich et al[11], 2020	United States	2 studies	TORe vs TORe-gastroplasty	% mean difference	2.6 (0.5 to 4.7)	The TORe group and demonstrated significantly a greater weight loss compared to TORe-gastroplasty
6 months
Singh et al[9], 2020	United States	1 study; 58 participants	ESG vs IGB	% mean difference	3.07 (1.46–4.67)	ESG achieved significantly (P = 0.002) superior weight loss compared to IGB
Jalal et al[10], 2020	Australia	2 studies; 348 participants	ESG vs LSG	% mean difference	8.52 (6.35–0.69)	LSG appeared to have a significantly (P < 0.00001) superior weight loss compared to ESG
Jaruvongvanich et al[11], 2020	United States	3 studies	ft-TORe vs APMC-TORe	% mean difference	0.3 (-5.5 to 6.0)	There was no significant difference between two treatments
Jaruvongvanich et al[11], 2020	United States	2 studies	TORe vs TORe-gastroplasty	% mean difference	0.8 (-2.3 to 3.9)	There was no significant difference between two treatments
12 months
Singh et al[9], 2020	United States	1 study; 58 participants	ESG vs IGB	% mean difference	7.33 (5.22-9.44)	ESG achieved significantly (P = 0.0001) superior weight loss compared to IGB
Mohan et al[13], 2020	United States	9 studies	ESG vs LSG	% mean	ESG: 17.08 (15.05-19.10); LSG: 30.5 (27.4-33.5)	LSG appeared to have a significantly (P = 0.001) superior weight loss compared to ESG
Madruga-Neto et al[4], 2018	Brazil	2 studies; 376 participants	EG vs Sham	% mean difference	4.8 (1.1-8.51)	The difference between the groups was significantly (P = 0.01) higher in the intervention group than in the control group
18-24 months
Singh et al[9], 2020	United States	1 study; 58 participants	ESG vs IGB	% mean difference	11.51 (5.33-17.69)	ESG achieved significantly (P = 0.0003) superior weight loss compared to IGB

APC: Argon plasma coagulation; APMC-TORe: Argon plasma mucosal coagulation alone; ESG: Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty; ft-TORe: Full-thickness suturing plus argon plasma mucosal coagulation; FTS: Full-thickness suturing; IGB: Intragastric balloon; LSG: Laparoscopic sleeve gastroplasty; TORe: Endoscopic transoral outlet reduction.