Systematic review and network meta‐analysis: efficacy of drugs for functional dyspepsia
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
SummaryBackgroundFunctional dyspepsia (FD) is a relapsing and remitting condition affecting between 5% and 10% of people. Efficacious therapies are available, but their relative efficacy is unknown.AimTo perform a systematic review with network meta‐analysis to resolve this uncertainty.MethodsWe searched the medical literature through July 2020 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing efficacy of drugs for adults with FD, compared with each other, or placebo. Trials reported a dichotomous assessment of symptom status after completion of therapy. We pooled data using a random effects model. Efficacy was reported as a pooled relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic with a 95% confidence interval (CI) to summarise efficacy of each comparison tested. Relative ranking was assessed with surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probabilities.ResultsWe identified 71 eligible RCTs (19 243 participants). Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) were ranked second for efficacy (RR of remaining symptomatic = 0.71; 95% CI 0.58‐0.87, SUCRA 0.87), and first when only low risk of bias trials were included. Most RCTs that used TCAs recruited patients who were refractory to other drugs included in the network. Although sulpiride or levosulpiride were ranked first for efficacy (RR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.36‐0.69, SUCRA 0.99), trial quality was low and only 86 patients received active therapy. TCAs were more likely to cause adverse events than placebo.ConclusionsTCAs, histamine‐2 receptor antagonists, standard‐ and low‐dose proton pump inhibitors, sulpiride or levosulpiride, itopride and acotiamide were all more efficacious than placebo for FD.
