4.2 Review

The Relationship Between Otitis Media With Effusion and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Meta-analysis

期刊

OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY
卷 42, 期 3, 页码 E245-E253

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000002945

关键词

Acute otitis media; Children; Chronic otitis media with effusion; Gastroesophageal reflux disease; Meta-analysis; Otitis media with effusion

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81600801]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study revealed a significant association between otitis media with effusion (OME) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), with a pooled odds ratio of 4.52. The random-effects model was used due to significant heterogeneity among studies, with no significant publication bias observed.
Objective: Recent studies have investigated the mechanism by which refluxed gastric materials reach the middle ear, to establish otitis media with effusion (OME) causal relation between them in both children and adults. Therefore, the relationship between OME and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) should be further studied extensively. Methods: To identify eligible original articles, we searched a range of computerized databases, including Medline via PubMed, EMBASE, CNKI, and Web of Science with a systematic searching strategy. Subgroup analysis was performed to analyze heterogeneity and Egger and Begg funnel plot to assess the publication bias of the included articles. Results: The meta-analysis had an overall sample size of 1961. We identified a significant relationship between OME and GERD, with a pooled odds ratio (OR) of 4.52 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.42-8.44; p < 0.001). The pooled data were calculated with the random-effects model as a high significant heterogeneity was found among the studies and there was no significant publication bias observed. Conclusions: The meta-analysis suggested that there was a significant association between otitis media with effusion and gastroesophageal reflux disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据