Evidence Hub

Quantified Metrics of Gastric Emptying Delay by Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Agonists: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Insights for Periprocedural Management

Hiramoto B, McCarty TR, Lodhia NA, Jenkins A, Elnaiem A, Muftah M, Flanagan R, Chan WW

The American journal of gastroenterology, 2024

411 participants

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Divergent recommendations for periprocedural management of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) medications rely on limited evidence. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide quantitative measures of gastric emptying relevant to mechanisms of weight loss and to periprocedural management of GLP-1 RA. We hypothesized that the magnitude of gastric emptying delay would be low and of limited clinical significance to procedural sedation risks.

METHODS: A protocolized search identified studies on GLP-1 RA that quantified gastric emptying measures. Pooled estimates using random effects were presented as a weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Univariate meta-regression was performed to assess the influence of GLP-1 RA type, short-acting vs long-acting mechanism of action, and duration of treatment on gastric emptying.

RESULTS: Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Five studies (n = 247) utilized gastric emptying scintigraphy. Mean T 1/2 was 138.4 minutes (95% CI 74.5-202.3) for GLP-1 RA vs 95.0 minutes (95% CI 54.9-135.0) for placebo, with a pooled mean difference of 36.0 minutes (95% CI 17.0-55.0, P 0.05). On meta-regression, the type of GLP-1 RA, mechanism of action, and treatment duration did not impact gastric emptying ( P > 0.05).

DISCUSSION: While a gastric emptying delay of ∼36 minutes is quantifiable on GLP-1 RA medications, it is of limited magnitude relative to standard periprocedural…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 411 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free