Efficacy of Endoscopic Interventions for the Management of Obesity: a Meta-analysis to Compare Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty, AspireAssist, and Primary Obesity Surgery Endolumenal

Abstract

Background and AimsNovel endoscopic procedures (endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG), AspireAssist (AA), and primary obesity surgery endolumenal (POSE)) have been developed for treatment of obesity. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the efficacy of these three endoscopic procedures.MethodsMain outcomes of interest were percent excess weight loss (%EWL) and percent total body weight loss (%TBWL). Weighted pooled means (WPMs) were calculated and analyzed using random effects model. Mean differences (MDs) were calculated to compare these procedures.ResultsTwelve studies with 1149 patients were included. WPMs for %EWL at 6 and 12\xa0months with ESG were 49.67 (45.67, 53.66) and 52.75 (43.52, 61.98), respectively, while %TBWLs at 6 and 12\xa0months with ESG were 16.01 (15.10, 16.92) and 17.41 (17.08, 17.74), respectively. WPMs for %EWL at 6 and 12\xa0months with POSE were 43.79 (40.17, 47.42) and 44.91 (40.90, 48.92), respectively. WPM for %EWL at 12\xa0months with AA was 50.85 (46.03, 55.68). While comparing ESG and POSE, at 6\xa0months and 12\xa0months, MD for %EWL was 6.17 (1.07, 11.26; P\u2009=\u20090.01) and 7.84 (−\u20092.05, 17.71; P\u2009=\u20090.06) in favor of ESG. No difference in %EWL was observed while comparing ESG with AA (P\u2009=\u20090.29). Likewise, MD for %EWL to compare AA and POSE was not significant (P\u2009=\u20090.68).ConclusionsDuring a follow-up of 6–12\xa0months, both AA and ESG had excellent efficacy in achieving significant and sustained weight loss; however, ESG was found to be superior in terms of weight loss when compared with POSE.