Comparisons Between Endoscopic Band Ligation, Radiofrequency Ablation and Endoscopic Thermal Therapy for Gastric Antral Vascular Ectasia: A Meta-Analysis

Background Endoscopic band ligation (EBL) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have emerged as alternative therapies of gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) in addition to endoscopic thermal therapy (ETT), but the optimum choice remains inconclusive. Aim We conducted a meta-analysis in order to compare these three treatments for GAVE. Methods We searched the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials without any language restrictions and also performed a manual literature search of bibliographies located in both retrieved articles and published reviews for eligible publications prior to December 8, 2021. We included comparative trials which had evaluated the efficacy and safety of interventions in adults (aged ≥ 18 years) diagnosed with symptomatic GAVE and was confirmed according to clinical backgrounds and upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. We included reports that compared three interventions, ETT, EBL, and RFA. The study was comprised of adults diagnosed with GAVE and focused on overall mortality, bleeding cessation, endoscopic improvement, complications, hospitalization, hemoglobin improvement, number of sessions and transfusion requirements. Results Twelve studies were performed involving a total of 571 participants for analysis. When compared with ETT, EBL achieved better bleeding cessation (OR 4.48, 95% CI 1.36–14.77, p = 0.01), higher hemoglobin improvement (MD 0.57, 95% CI 0.31–0.83, p < 0.01) and lower number of sessions (MD − 1.44, 95% CI − 2.54 to − 0.34, p = 0.01). Additionally, EBL was superior to ETT in endoscopic improvement (OR 6.00, 95% CI 2.26–15.97, p < 0.01), hospitalization (MD − 1.32, 95% CI − 1.91 to − 0.74, p < 0.01) and transfusion requirement (MD − 2.66, 95% CI − 4.67 to − 0.65, p = 0.01) with statistical significance, with the exception of mortality (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.19–1.77, p = 0.34) and complication rate (OR 5.33, 95% CI 0.58–48.84, p = 0.14). Conclusion For GAVE, we suggest that EBL be initially recommended, and APC and RFA be used as alternative treatment choices based upon a very low quality of evidence.