Fluid-Filled Versus Gas-Filled Intragastric Balloons as Obesity Interventions: a Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials
Four commercially available intragastric balloons have been used for the management of obesity and underwent randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and we aimed to compare them using a network meta-analysis approach.
Several databases were queried from inception to May 26, 2017, and we included RCTs enrolling patients treated with Orbera, Heliosphere, ReShape Duo, and Obalon compared with another balloon, sham, or open-label control group. Two investigators independently abstracted data. A random effects frequentist network meta-analysis and relative ranking of agents using surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities were performed.
We included 15 trials at low risk of bias (only two were head-to-head). Compared to control groups, the two fluid-filled devices were associated with significant outcome (% total body weight loss) at 6 months: Orbera, 6.72% (95% CI, 5.55, 7.89) and ReShape Duo 4% (95% CI 2.69, 5.31). Only one of the two gas-filled devices was associated with significant outcome at 6 months: Obalon 3.3% (95% CI 2.30, 4.30), and not the second: Heliosphere 6.71% (95% CI − 0.82, 14.23). Fluid-filled devices had the highest likelihood of superiority in achieving the outcome at 6 months (96.8%) and at 12 months (96.6%). The quality of evidence was high for comparisons against control.
Fluid-filled balloons are more likely to produce weight loss compared to gas-filled balloons or lifestyle intervention. However, they may be associated with a higher rate of intolerance and early removal. This information will aid clinicians in device selection and engaging patients in shared decision-making.
KeywordsWeight loss Bariatric endoscopic therapies Therapeutic endoscopy
Body mass index
Endoscopic bariatric therapies
Excess weight loss
Food and Drug Administration
Randomized controlled trial
Serious adverse events
Fateh Bazerbachi MD, Samir Haffar MD, M. Hassan Murad MD, MPH, and Barham K. Abu Dayyeh MD, MPH, contributed to the study concept and design, interpretation of data, drafting of the manuscript, critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content, and study supervision. Tarek Sawas, Ravinder Jeet Kaur, and Eric J. Vargas contributed to the data acquisition and critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. Larry J. Prokop contributed to the librarian search and critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. Zhen Wang contributed to the statistical analysis and critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
Conflict of Interest
Fateh Bazerbachi: none, Samir Haffar: none, Tarek Sawas: none, Eric J. Vargas: none, Ravinder Jeet Kaur: none, Zhen Wang: none, Larry Prokop: none, M. Hassan Murad: none, Barham K. Abu Dayyeh received research grants by Spatz Medical and Apollo Endosurgery.
- 10.Jansen JP, Fleurence R, Devine B, et al. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis for health-care decision making: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 1. Value Health. 2011;14(4):417–28.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Huwaldt JA. Plot Digitizer 2.4. 1. Free software distributed from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/plotdigitizer. 2005.
- 35.Ponce J, Woodman G, Swain J, et al. The REDUCE pivotal trial: a prospective, randomized controlled pivotal trial of a dual intragastric balloon for the treatment of obesity. Surg. 2015;11(4):874–81.Google Scholar
- 36.Dargent J, Angella S, Pontette F. Post-operative trajectories in bariatric patients: comprehensive analysis of a consecutive series with an original endoscopic method over two years. Obesite. 2016;11(1):39–46. FrenchGoogle Scholar
- 42.Watt KD, Heimbach J, Rizk M, et al., editors. Endoscopic intragastric balloon placement for weight loss in liver transplant candidates. Hepatology. Hoboken: Wiley; 2017.Google Scholar
- 45.Vargas EJ, Pesta CM, Bali A, et al. Single fluid-filled intragastric balloon safe and effective for inducing weight loss in a real-world population. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.01.046.
- 46.FDA. Liquid-filled intragastric balloon systems: letter to healthcare providers—potential risks. U.S. Food & Drug Administration.; 2017 [updated 08/10/20171/22/2018]; Available from: https://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/SafetyAlertsforHumanMedicalProducts/ucm570916.htm.
- 47.Maisel W. The FDA alerts health care providers about potential risks with liquid-filled intragastric balloons. U.S. Food & Drug Administration.; 2017 [1/22/2018]; Available from: https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ResourcesforYou/HealthCareProviders/ucm540655.htm.
- 50.Neto MG, Silva LB, Grecco E, et al. Brazilian Intragastric Balloon Consensus Statement (BIBC): practical guidelines based on experience of over 40,000 cases. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017.Google Scholar