Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2023.
World J Clin Cases. Oct 26, 2023; 11(30): 7329-7336
Published online Oct 26, 2023. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i30.7329
Table 1 Baseline characteristics of patients included in the study
Study identifier
Khoury et al[7], 1999
Schuitenmaker et al[8], 2022
Schuitenmaker et al[9], 2022
Study designCross-sectionalCross-sectionalRandomized Controlled Trial
Study locationUnited States of AmericaNetherlandsNetherlands
GroupsN/AN/AInterventionSham
Number of subject10575050
Age (yr) mean ± SD/(range) 47.6 (30-67)48.9 ± 16.152.0 ± 12.052.5 ± 12.2
Sex ratio (M/F)7/326/3116/3421/29
BMI kg/m2, mean ± SDNR26.7 ± 4.625.1 ± 4.326.3 ± 4.1
Smoking N (%)NRNR4 (8)4 (8)
Disease severity, N (%)NRGrade A RE: 10 (17.5); Grade B RE: 11 (19.3); Grade C RE: 2 (3.5); NERD: 16 (29.1); Esophageal hypersensitivity: 9 (16.4); Functional heartburn: 7 (12.7); Unknown: 2 (3.5)NRNR
Diaphgramatic hernia, N (%)NR32 (56.1) with mean size 3.0 ± 1.3Total: 32; Yes: 13 (40.6); No: 13 (40.6); Unknown: 6 (18.8)Total 30; Yes: 13 (43.3); No: 15 (50.0); Unknown: 2 (6.7)
Medication use, N (%)NonePPI and H2RA: 9 (15.8); PPI: 37 (64.9); H2RA: 1 (1.8); None: 10 (17.5)PPI: 20 (40); H2RA: 2 (4); Antacids: 33 (66)PPI: 27 (54); H2RA: 3 (6); Antacids: 27 (54)
GERDQ score, mean ± SDNRNR11.9 ± 2.0 12.2 ± 2.0