NICEVIVA
DRUG INTERACTION RECORDED 1 Prescription Drug Interaction(s) Reported — Review the pharmacokinetic interaction matrix below before use.
Pharmacokinetic Alert
MONOGRAPH SPEC LATEST 2026

DGL Licorice (Heartburn)

DIGESTIVE · Evidence Monograph

DGL Licorice (Heartburn) is an evidence-graded digestive monograph evaluated across 30 peer-reviewed PubMed studies (10 meta-analyses, 0 systematic reviews, and 7 randomized controlled trials, encompassing n = 84,961 cumulative participants). Current clinical evidence is rated GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) for targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support.

Evidence Grade (GRADE) High (4.0 / 4.0)
Indexed PubMed Studies 30 Studies
Meta-Analyses · Reviews 10 Meta · 0 Systematic Reviews
Randomized Trials (RCT) 7 RCTs (1 Double-Blind)
Cumulative Participants n = 84,961
Reported Trial Dosages 1.4 g/day · 50 mg
Trial Duration Range 78 days · 4 weeks · 6 months
Reading Time ~15 min
RECOMMENDED FOR Clinical Indication

Evidence Supports Supplementation When:

  1. 01 Individuals seeking evidence-backed support for targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support (supported by 30 indexed PubMed studies, GRADE High).
  2. 02 Adults matching clinical trial dosing protocols (1.4 g/day · 50 mg) over a structured 78 days evaluation window.
  3. 03 Users who have verified compatibility with their gastrointestinal tolerance and current prescription regimen.
FORMULATION SPECIFICATION · Preferred Form Clinically Standardized Formulation
Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.
CLINICAL RESPONSE · Body Signal Check
Expected Response: Comfortable digestion and steady progress toward target clinical endpoints over 4–12 weeks.
Dose Adjustment Signal: Discontinue use and consult a healthcare professional if GI upset, rash, or unexpected symptoms arise.
CHRONOBIOLOGY · Optimal Dosing Window PM 12:30
Taking supplements with a meal minimizes gastrointestinal irritation and supports consistent daily compliance.
Primary Clinical Endpoints & Physiological Biomarkers Studied Based on Indexed PubMed Trials
Primary digestive clinical efficacy (30 PubMed studies)
Quantitative biomarker & outcome analysis (23 studies with effect-size/sample data)
Randomized controlled trial verification (7 RCTs · 1 double-blind)
Systematic review & meta-analysis synthesis (10 meta-analyses · 0 reviews)
01

What Is DGL Licorice (Heartburn) & Why Does Form Matter?

DGL Licorice (Heartburn) is classified under DIGESTIVE and has been investigated across 30 peer-reviewed PubMed publications for its role in targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support.

In clinical nutrition, physiological efficacy depends heavily on the specific chemical salt, chelate, or standardized extract used, as well as adherence to trial-validated dosing (1.4 g/day, 50 mg).

02

Who Benefits Most & Common Depletion Factors

Suboptimal status or increased physiological demand for DGL Licorice (Heartburn) frequently arises from restrictive dietary patterns, age-related declines in gastrointestinal absorption, chronic metabolic stress, or medication-induced nutrient depletion.

Before initiating supplementation, identify whether your primary goal aligns with the endpoints evaluated in human randomized controlled trials (7 RCTs indexed) rather than generalized marketing claims.

03

Physiological Mechanism of Action

Within human physiology, DGL Licorice (Heartburn) acts on pathways governing targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support. Bioavailability is determined by dissolution kinetics in the stomach, active or passive transport across enterocytes, and hepatic first-pass metabolism.

Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.

04

PubMed Clinical Evidence & GRADE Evaluation

NICEVIVA assigns DGL Licorice (Heartburn) an overall evidence rating of GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) based on 30 PubMed studies: 10 meta-analyses, 0 systematic reviews, and 7 randomized controlled trials (1 double-blind, n = 84,961 total participants).

Representative peer-reviewed findings include: • PMID:42004711 (2026) — "Difference in the risk of gastrointestinal manifestations between peritoneal and hemodialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis." (CONCLUSIONS: Present evidence from a small number of observational studies suggests that majority of GI signs or symptoms do not differ between HD and patients receiving PD.) • PMID:41574348 (2025) — "Efficacy and safety of probiotics combined with bismuth-containing quadruple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication: a systematic review and meta-analysis." (pylori eradication rate and reduces adverse events, particularly diarrhea and constipation.) • PMID:41524830 (2026) — "A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: the effect of potassium-competitive acid blockers on nighttime symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease." (Safety analysis of the three trials showed no significant difference in TEAE risk (RR0.88, 95% CI 0.53-1.45; p = 0.62).)

Quantitative Clinical Effect-Size Distribution (Forest Plot)

Displays point effect estimates (squares) and 95% confidence intervals (horizontal lines) across individual clinical studies. Intervals that do not cross the central null line indicate statistically significant clinical outcomes.

Study (PMID · Year)RR Effect Size & 95% CI DistributionEstimate (95% CI)PMID 415743481.06 (1.01–1.11)PMID 414376950.69PMID 420068601.01 (0.98–1.05)0.2Null (1)5Metric: RR
05

Formulation Selection, Dosing & Chronobiology

Recommended Formulation: Clinically Standardized Formulation. Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.

Clinical Trial Dosing & Timing: Published studies most commonly utilize 1.4 g/day · 50 mg over 78 days · 4 weeks · 6 months · 28 days. Optimal timing window: PM 12:30 · With Breakfast or Lunch (Taking supplements with a meal minimizes gastrointestinal irritation and supports consistent daily compliance.).

06

Body Response Monitoring & Dose Adjustment

Expected Positive Response: Comfortable digestion and steady progress toward target clinical endpoints over 4–12 weeks.

Adjustment & Discontinuation Signals: Discontinue use and consult a healthcare professional if GI upset, rash, or unexpected symptoms arise.

07

Prescription Drug Interactions & Contraindications

• [MODERATE] Concomitant Prescription Medication: Pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction reported in clinical literature (PMID:17887936). Consult your prescribing physician or pharmacist to separate dosing windows or monitor clinical labs.

08

4 Essential Safety Rules Before & After Dosing

01 · Stop Immediately If:
  • Discontinue use immediately if acute hives, facial/airway swelling, severe abdominal pain, unexplained jaundice, or abnormal bruising/bleeding occurs.
  • Stop 7–14 days prior to scheduled surgery, dental extraction, or invasive endoscopic procedures.
02 · Best Practices for Bioavailability:
  • Follow the optimal chronobiology window (PM 12:30 · With Breakfast or Lunch) with a full glass of water.
  • Stay within clinically studied daily dosages (1.4 g/day · 50 mg) and re-evaluate efficacy after 78 days.
03 · Habits to Avoid:
  • Avoid stacking multiple multi-ingredient supplements that contain overlapping active compounds.
  • Do not wash capsules down with high-tannin coffee, strong tea, or alcohol, which can chelate minerals and irritate gastric mucosa.
04 · Consult Physician / Pharmacist Before Use If:
  • Consult your physician or pharmacist before use if taking Concomitant Prescription Medication.
  • Seek professional medical guidance if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or managing chronic kidney or liver disease.
09 · PUBMED CLINICAL STUDIES

Indexed PubMed Clinical Studies & Abstracts (30 Studies) · 23 Quantitative Analyses

01
META-ANALYSIS PeerJ (2026) PMID: 42004711 ↗
Difference in the risk of gastrointestinal manifestations between peritoneal and hemodialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in PeerJ. Key conclusion: CONCLUSIONS: Present evidence from a small number of observational studies suggests that majority of GI signs or symptoms do not differ between HD and patients receiving PD.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVE: A large number of patients on dialysis have gastrointestinal (GI) manifestations. However, it remains unclear whether dialysis modality affects their prevalence. We present the first systematic review and meta-analysis of literature comparing the risk of GI manifestations between hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD). METHODS: Comparative studies were searched on Embase, PubMed, and Scopus from January 1, 2000, to April 1, 2025. Any GI manifestation reported by at least two studies were quantitatively analysed to obtain the odds ratio (OR) in a random-effect meta-analysis model. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies were included. Pooled analysis of four studies showed no statistically significant difference in the presence of any GI manifestation between HD and PD. Moreover, the meta-analysis showed no significant differences between the two groups for abdominal pain, anorexia, constipation, diarrhoea, duodenal ulcer, dyspepsia, dysphagia, epigastric pain, esophagitis, gastritis, heartburn, inflammatory bowel disease, nausea, vomiting, pancreatitis, and GI polyps. The risk of cirrhosis, pancreatitis, GI bleeding, and gastric ulcer was significantly higher in HD while the risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease was significantly increased in patients on PD. CONCLUSIONS: Present evidence from a small number of observational studies suggests that majority of GI signs or symptoms do not differ between HD and patients receiving PD. The risk of cirrhosis, pancreatitis, GI bleeding, and gastric ulcer appears higher in HD, whereas the likelihood of gastroesophageal reflux disease is elevated in PD. Observed differences between HD and PD should be interpreted cautiously, as they may partly reflect differences in patient selection, comorbidity profiles, and care pathways rather than a direct causal effect of dialysis modality. Further research can strengthen the quality of the evidence. ©2026 Li et al.

02
META-ANALYSIS Frontiers in microbiology (2025) PMID: 41574348 ↗
Efficacy and safety of probiotics combined with bismuth-containing quadruple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Meta-Analysis published in Frontiers in microbiology involving n = 1,630 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.009 (RR 1.06). Key conclusion: pylori eradication rate and reduces adverse events, particularly diarrhea and constipation.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVE: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection represents a global health challenge. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of probiotic supplementation on the efficacy and safety of bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (BQT) for H. pylori eradication. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) meeting the eligibility criteria were identified through systematic searches of five databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Meta-analyses were conducted using Review Manager software with a random-effects model to calculate pooled relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The potential publication bias was evaluated qualitatively, and the certainty of the evidence was subsequently assessed. RESULTS: In total, 10 RCTs involving 1,630 patients were included in the analysis. The results demonstrated that, compared with the BQT group, the H. pylori eradication rate was significantly higher in the probiotics combined with the BQT group (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.11, p = 0.009, ARR = 7.5%, NNT ≈ 13). Additionally, the combined therapy significantly reduced the adverse event rate (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42-0.80, p = 0.001, ARR = 11.1%, NNT ≈ 9), diarrhea (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32-0.73, p = 0.0007, ARR = 0.7%, NNT ≈ 142), and constipation (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.94, p = 0.04, ARR = 2.5%, NNT ≈ 40). However, no statistically significant differences were observed for other specific adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, anorexia, heartburn, belching, taste disturbance, abdominal pain, and abdominal bloating. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results for the H. pylori eradication rate and adverse event rate. CONCLUSION: Combining probiotics with BQT significantly increases the H. pylori eradication rate and reduces adverse events, particularly diarrhea and constipation. These findings support the role of probiotics as a supplementary strategy to enhance both the efficacy and safety of H. pylori eradication therapy. However, the overall certainty of the evidence is low to very low, and the optimal probiotic protocol has yet to be determined, highlighting the need for further high-quality researc

03
META-ANALYSIS Esophagus (2026) PMID: 41524830 ↗
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: the effect of potassium-competitive acid blockers on nighttime symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in Esophagus; statistical significance reported at p = 0.002. Key conclusion: Safety analysis of the three trials showed no significant difference in TEAE risk (RR0.88, 95% CI 0.53-1.45; p = 0.62).
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Potassium-competitive acid blockers (PCABs), a new class of potent and sustained acid-suppressing drugs, have emerged as an alternative to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) management. However, the specific benefits of PCABs for nocturnal GERD symptoms remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PCAB therapy compared with PPIs or placebo for managing nighttime heartburn and related symptoms in adults with GERD. We systematically searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases from inception to August 8, 2024. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any PCAB (vonoprazan, tegoprazan, or fexuprazan) with either a PPI or placebo in adult GERD patients. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with complete resolution of nighttime heartburn throughout the treatment period; the secondary outcome was the treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models with risk ratios (RRs). Sensitivity analyses were used to assess the robustness of the results. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Three RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. PCABs significantly increased the likelihood of complete nighttime heartburn resolution compared with PPIs (RR2.29, 95% CI 1.36-3.87; p = 0.002), with no heterogeneity. Safety analysis of the three trials showed no significant difference in TEAE risk (RR0.88, 95% CI 0.53-1.45; p = 0.62). The findings were consistent across all sensitivity analyses. Our study results suggest that PCABs therapy may provide better nighttime heartburn resolution than PPIs. © 2026. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to The Japan Esophageal Society.

04
CLINICAL STUDY Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology (2026) PMID: 41437695 ↗
Efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of potassium-competitive acid blockers versus proton pump inhibitors in gastroesophageal reflux disease.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology involving n = 5,133 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.02 (RR 0.69). Key conclusion: Due to the limited follow-up duration in the included studies, the conclusions are applicable only to short-term symptom control.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) versus proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) through a meta-analysis, explores the preliminary pharmacoeconomic advantages. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing P-CABs and PPIs for GERD treatment were identified from database, up to July 2025. After processing the studies and extracting the data. RevMan and Stata was used for data analysis. A preliminary pharmacoeconomic analysis was performed based on market survey data. RESULTS: A total of 10 RCTs (5133 participants) were included. P-CABs demonstrated better overall efficacy than PPIs [risk ratio (RR) = 0.72, P = 0.02]. Sensitivity analysis indicated higher applicability in Asian populations (RR = 0.69, P = 0.01). Subgroup analysis showed P-CABs had a significant advantage over lansoprazole (P < 0.001, RR = 0.50), but not over esomeprazole (P = 0.93). P-CABs were superior in the low-dose group, 2-week and 8-week treatment courses group. In the high-dose P-CABs group, 4-week treatment courses group, heartburn relief group and adverse event rates were comparable to PPIs. Pharmacoeconomic analysis revealed that CERP-CABs ≈ 0.1 CNY/day (d)/1%cure rate (1%CR); CERPPIs ≈ 0.01 CNY/d/1%CR; ICER = 3.125 CNY/d/1%CR. CONCLUSIONS: P-CABs demonstrate relatively greater efficacy than PPIs, especially in Asian populations. However, in terms of symptom relief, mid-term efficacy and safety both classes show comparable effects. PPIs are more cost-effective in specific contexts. Due to the limited follow-up duration in the included studies, the conclusions are applicable only to short-term symptom control.

05
META-ANALYSIS Annals of surgery (2026) PMID: 41408543 ↗
Long-term (>10 Years) Outcomes of Laparoscopic Nissen Fundoplication: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in Annals of surgery involving n = 1,334 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.001. Key conclusion: CONCLUSIONS: LNF provides durable long-term improvement of GERD symptoms.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate long-term outcomes and patient-reported satisfaction after Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF). BACKGROUND: LNF has demonstrated short-term and mid-term symptom relief in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, long-term outcomes have not been clearly defined. METHODS: A systematic PubMed search identified studies of LNF for GERD with ≥10-year follow-up. The main outcome was effectiveness of the operation, which was determined by symptomatic improvement, esophagitis improvement, and proton pump inhibitor use. Secondary endpoints included adverse events, patient satisfaction, and willingness to undergo LNF again. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed to calculate weighted pooled estimates with 95% CIs, and paired t tests compared preoperative and postoperative symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies comprising 1334 patients were analyzed. The mean follow-up across studies was 13.1 (10 to 22) years. The presence of heartburn decreased from 94.2% to 33.7% ( P < 0.001), regurgitation from 68.7% to 13.4% ( P = 0.02), and esophagitis from 61.7% to 7.4% ( P = 0.001). The weighted pooled proportion of symptom recurrence was 17% (95% CI, 5%-47%). Postoperative proton pump inhibitor use was reported in 24% (95% CI, 14%-38%) of patients. Gas-bloating and dysphagia occurred in 53% (95% CI, 20%-83%) and 26% (95% CI, 18%-37%) of patients. Overall patient satisfaction was 87% (95% CI, 81%-92%), and 87% of patients (95% CI, 82%-90%) reported willingness to undergo LNF again. The proportion of patients requiring reoperation was 6% (95% CI, 3%-9%). CONCLUSIONS: LNF provides durable long-term improvement of GERD symptoms. Although postoperative gas-bloating and dysphagia are frequent, long-term patients' satisfaction is high.

06
META-ANALYSIS BMC pregnancy and childbirth (2025) PMID: 41366751 ↗
Global prevalence and risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms in pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Meta-Analysis published in BMC pregnancy and childbirth (OR 8.37). Key conclusion: Early identification and management may improve maternal comfort and quality of life.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), manifested by heartburn and regurgitation, is a common pregnancy complaint that significantly impairs quality of life. Reported prevalence varies widely, with differences observed across pregnancy trimesters. This first systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing global data aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence and risk of GERD symptoms during pregnancy, including trimester-specific trends. METHODOLOGY: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar from 1 January 1975 to 10 July 2025. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251102794). Eligible studies included observational studies reporting the prevalence of GERD symptoms in pregnant populations. Two independent reviewers screened articles, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects meta-analysis model was applied. RESULTS: A total of 21 studies involving 9497 pregnant participants were included. The pooled prevalence of GERD symptoms during pregnancy was 40.96% (95% CI: 27.63-54.28). Subgroup analysis by trimester revealed a progressive increase in GERD prevalence, from 26.12% in the first trimester to 33.40% in the second, peaking at 55.93% in the third, reflecting the growing physiological burden. In studies that included non-pregnant control groups, pregnant women had a significantly higher risk of experiencing GERD symptoms compared to non-pregnant controls (OR = 8.37; 95% CI: 2.93-23.89). Subgroup analysis showed that the pooled prevalence of heartburn was 43.81% (95% CI: 23.74-63.87), while regurgitation affected 37.94% (95% CI: 26.23-49.65) of pregnant women. CONCLUSION: GERD symptoms are highly prevalent during pregnancy, especially in the third trimester. Early identification and management may improve maternal comfort and quality of life. © 2025. The Author(s).

07
META-ANALYSIS Diseases of the esophagus (2025) PMID: 41348606 ↗
Durability and reflux outcomes of peroral endoscopic myotomy compared to laparoscopic heller myotomy in achalasia: a meta-analysis of long-term studies.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Meta-Analysis published in Diseases of the esophagus involving n = 1,158 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.001 (OR 1.43). Key conclusion: POEM offers advantages in shorter operative time and hospital stay but is associated with a higher need for long-term PPI therapy.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) for the treatment of achalasia. While short-term outcomes have been widely studied, evidence on long-term efficacy and safety remains limited and heterogeneous. This meta-analysis aimed to compare long-term clinical outcomes between POEM and LHM. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to 15th August 2025. Studies were included if they directly compared POEM with LHM, reported outcomes with ≥2 years of follow-up, and provided data on operative time, length of hospital stay, functional outcomes, or reflux-related outcomes. Pooled mean differences (MDs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: A total of 10 studies involving 1158 patients (POEM = 609; LHM = 549) were included, comprising nine unique studies and one follow-up publication. POEM was associated with significantly shorter operative time (MD: -31.65 minutes, 95% CI: -46.39 to -16.92, P < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (MD: -0.78 days, 95% CI: -1.40 to -0.52, P < 0.001). Functional outcomes, including dysphagia scores (MD: -0.24, 95% CI: -0.62 to 0.15, P = 0.23), postoperative Eckardt scores (MD: 0.11, 95% CI: -0.38 to 0.60, P = 0.65), and treatment success rates (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 0.96 to 2.13, P = 0.08), were comparable between POEM and LHM at both 2-5 years and ≥ 5 years. Reflux-related outcomes, including RSI, GERD-HRQL, GERD symptoms, heartburn resolution, and incidence of esophagitis, did not significantly differ between groups. However, continued postoperative proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use was significantly more frequent after POEM (OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.35 to 2.78, P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Both POEM and LHM provide durable long-term relief of achalasia symptoms with comparable efficacy and reflux-related outcomes. POEM offers advantages in shorter operative time and hospital stay but is associated with a higher need for long-term PPI therapy. These findings

08
META-ANALYSIS Zhonghua wei chang wai ke za zhi = Chinese journal of gastrointestinal surgery (2025) PMID: 41139639 ↗
[Safety and efficacy of endoscopic and surgical anti-reflux procedures for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis].
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Meta-Analysis published in Zhonghua wei chang wai ke za zhi = Chinese journal of gastrointestinal surgery; statistical significance reported at p = 0.05. Key conclusion: Conclusions: Both endoscopic and surgical treatments are effective for GERD.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Objective: This study aims to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing the safety and efficacy of endoscopic versus surgical treatments for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Methods: Randomized controlled trials were identified through systematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CNKI. Both direct effect models and Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis were used to compare treatments directly and indirectly. The following types of studies were included : (1) RCTs involving endoscopic or surgical treatment for adult GERD patients aged ≥18 years with no previous history of gastroesophageal surgery; (2) studies comparing two or more treatment methods, including different endoscopic or surgical procedures, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, and/or sham surgery; and (3) articles published in Chinese or English. Review articles and conference abstracts were excluded. Results: A total of 47 randomized controlled trials were enrolled, and 43 studies were network meta-analyzed. Both endoscopic and surgical treatments significantly reduced postoperative PPI use compared to PPI therapy (P <0.05). Among all treatment modalities, laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF, SUCRA=0.84) demonstrated the highest efficacy, followed by laparoscopic Toupet fundoplication (LTF, SUCRA=0.71) and anterior partial fundoplication (APF, SUCRA=0.70). Transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) demonstrated the best outcomes in relieving heartburn (SUCRA=0.87) and bloating (SUCRA=0.86) symptoms. The overall safety of surgical treatment was comparable to that of PPI therapy. However, LNF was associated with a higher incidence of postoperative dysphagia and gas-related symptoms, whereas TIF had a lower risk of postoperative complications. Conclusions: Both endoscopic and surgical treatments are effective for GERD. LNF provides the highest rate of medication discontinuation but carries a higher risk of postoperative complications. TIF offers better relief of heartburn and bloating with fewer complications. Publisher: 目的: 通过系统评价和网状Meta分析,综合比较内镜与外科手术治疗胃食管反流病(GERD)的疗效及安全性。 方法: 系统检索MEDLINE、Embase、Web of Science及中国知网数据库,纳入符合下述标准的随机对照研究(RCT):(1)针对

09
META-ANALYSIS Medicine (2025) PMID: 40419902 ↗
The positive role of Chinese herbal medicine as an adjunctive therapy for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Meta-Analysis published in Medicine. Key conclusion: CONCLUSION: The findings of this study indicate that CHM offers a positive adjunctive therapeutic benefit for rGERD; however, it is imperative to enhance the quality of future RCTs to validate these preliminary findings.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors are currently the primary treatment option for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (rGERD), yet they have limitations, including poor efficacy and potential adverse events. Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) may offer an effective and safe adjunctive therapy. METHODS: This network meta-analysis investigate the adjunctive therapeutic effect and safety of CHM on rGERD. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CHM combined with conventional Western medicine in the treatment of rGERD added to 8 online databases from its inception to January 2024 were systematically searched. Review Manager 5.3 and and Stata 14.0 software were used to conduct pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis of RCTs that met the inclusion criteria. In addition, the methodological quality of RCTs was analyzed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias ROB 2.0 assessment tool. This study was registered in PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) (CRD42024532264). RESULTS: This study included a total of 19 RCTs, comparing 16 CHMs. Pairwise meta-analysis indicated that CHM combined with conventional Western medicine outperformed the latter in terms of overall clinical efficacy, recurrence rate, and symptom improvement. Network meta-analysis suggested that Shugan Jieyu Capsule may significantly enhance overall clinical efficacy, while Buzhongyiqi Granules may significantly reduce the recurrence rate, Sanji Powders may significantly improve symptoms of acid reflux, Shugan Jieyu Capsule may significantly improve symptoms of heartburn, and Shugan Jianpi Hewei Decoction may significantly improve symptoms of esophageal chest pain, Qingweishu Granules may significantly improve the frequency scale for the symptoms of GERD score. No serious adverse events were reported in any of the RCTs. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study indicate that CHM offers a positive adjunctive therapeutic benefit for rGERD; however, it is imperative to enhance the quality of future RCTs to validate these preliminary findings.

10
META-ANALYSIS Digestive and liver disease (2025) PMID: 40382208 ↗
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: the role of potassium-competitive acid blockers in endoscopy-negative reflux disease.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Meta-Analysis published in Digestive and liver disease involving n = 2,387 participants. Key conclusion: CONCLUSIONS: PCABs are superior to placebos in enhancing heartburn resolution and reducing heartburn severity in patients with ENRD, and their safety profile is comparable to that of placebos.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Although proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) have long been the mainstay of therapy for endoscopy-negative reflux disease (ENRD), their therapeutic limitations have become apparent. AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of potassium-competitive acid blockers (PCABs) compared to PPIs/placebos in treating ENRD. METHODS: Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PCABs with PPIs/placebos in ENRD and indexed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL until May 20, 2024, were included. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed to pool the primary efficacy outcomes (heartburn resolution and mean heartburn severity at week four) and safety data (any treatment-emergent adverse event or TEAE). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool. RESULTS: Four RCTs comparing PCABs and placebos with a total of 2387 participants, were included. All the trials had a low risk of bias. Compared with placebos, PCABs significantly increased the likelihood of heartburn resolution (risk ratio[RR]:1.43;95 %CI:1.22-1.68). The severity of heartburn was significantly reduced by PCABs (standardized mean difference[SMD]:0.19;95 %CI:0.35 to -0.02). TEAEs were comparable between the PCABs and placebos (odds ratio[OR]:1.06;95 %CI:0.82-1.37). CONCLUSIONS: PCABs are superior to placebos in enhancing heartburn resolution and reducing heartburn severity in patients with ENRD, and their safety profile is comparable to that of placebos.

RELATED MONOGRAPHS

Related Monographs in This Category