Endoluminal gastroplasty (EndoCinch) versus endoscopic polymer implantation (Enteryx) for treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease: 6-month results of a prospective, randomized trial

Endoscopic full-thickness plication for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux after peroral endoscopic myotomy: a randomized sham-controlled study

BACKGROUND : Endoscopic full-thickness plication (EFTP) has shown promising results in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but its efficacy in GERD after peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is unclear. METHODS : In a prospective, randomized trial of post-POEM patients dependent on proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for documented GERD, patients underwent EFTP (plication to remodel the gastroesophageal flap valve) or an endoscopic sham procedure (positioning of the EFTP device, but no stapling). The primary end point was improvement in acid exposure time (AET) < 6 % (3 months). Secondary end points included improvement in esophagitis (3 months), GERD Questionnaire (GERDQ) score (3 and 6 months), and PPI usage (6 months). RESULTS : 60 patients were randomized (30 in each group). At 3 months, a significantly higher proportion of patients achieved improvement in AET < 6 % in the EFTP group compared with the sham group (69.0 % [95 %CI 52.1-85.8] vs. 10.3 % [95 %CI 0-21.4], respectively). EFTP was statistically superior to sham (within-group analysis) in improving esophageal AET, DeMeester Score, and all reflux episodes (P < 0.001). A nonsignificant improvement in esophagitis was noted in the EFTP group (P = 0.14). Median GERDQ scores (3 months) were significantly better (P < 0.001) in the EFTP group, and the same trend continued at 6 months. A higher proportion of patients in the sham group continued to use PPIs (72.4 % [95 %CI 56.1-88.7] vs. 27.6 % [95 %CI 11.3-43.8]). There were no major adverse events in either group. CONCLUSION : EFTP improved post-POEM GERD symptoms, 24-hour pH impedance findings with normalization in one-third, and reduced PPI usage at 6 months.

Efficacy of Endoscopic and Surgical Treatments for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Although various endoscopic and surgical procedures are available for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), the comparative efficacy of these treatments has not been fully elucidated. This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of various endoscopic and surgical treatments for GERD. All relevant randomized controlled trials published through August 2021 that compared the efficacy of endoscopic and surgical GERD treatments, including radiofrequency energy delivery, endoscopic plication, reinforcement of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES), and surgical fundoplication, were searched. A network meta-analysis was performed to analyze treatment outcomes, including the requirement of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) continuation and GERD-health-related quality of life questionnaire score (GERD-HRQL). As such, 25 studies with 2854 patients were included in the analysis. Endoscopic plication, reinforcement of the LES, and surgical fundoplication were effective in reducing the requirement of PPI continuation compared to PPI therapy (pooled risk ratio (RR) (95% confidence interval [CI]): endoscopic plication, 0.34 (0.21–0.56); reinforcement of LES, 0.32 (0.16–0.63), and surgical fundoplication, 0.16 (0.06–0.42)). Radiofrequency energy delivery tended to reduce the requirement of PPI continuation compared to PPI therapy (RR (95% CI): 0.55 (0.25–1.18)). In terms of GERD-HRQL, all endoscopic and surgical treatments were superior to PPI therapy. In conclusion, all endoscopic or surgical treatments, except radiofrequency energy delivery, were effective for discontinuation of PPI medication, especially surgical fundoplication. Quality of life, measured by GERD-HRQL, also improved in patients who underwent endoscopic or surgical treatment compared to those who received PPI therapy.

Endoscopic treatments for GERD

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a condition with increasing prevalence and morbidity in the United States and worldwide. Despite advances in medical and surgical therapy over the last 30 years, gaps remain in the therapeutic profile of options. Flexible upper endoscopy offers the promise of filling in these gaps in a potentially minimally invasive approach. In this concise review, we focus on the plethora of endoluminal therapies available for the treatment of GERD. Therapies discussed include injectable agents, electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter, antireflux mucosectomy, radiofrequency ablation, and endoscopic suturing devices designed to create a fundoplication. As new endoscopic treatments become available, we come closer to the promise of the incisionless treatment of GERD. The known data surrounding the indications, benefits, and risks of these historical, current, and emerging approaches are reviewed in detail.

Endoscopic polymer injection and endoluminal plication in treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease: evaluation of long-term results

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 Us of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) has made endoscopic treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) more efficient, with reduction in morbidity and complications. However, some patients persist with symptoms despite medical treatment and some are not compliant with it or cannot afford it for financial reasons, and thus they require non-pharmacological therapeutic options such as surgical fundoplication. Surgery may be effective in the short term, but there is related morbidity and concern about its long-term efficacy. The possibility of minimally invasive endoluminal surgeries has resulted in interest in and development of newly endoscopic devices. Good short-term results with surgical fundoplication lack of studies of is with long follow-up justify our interest in this study. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of endoscopic polymer injection and endoluminal full-thickness plication in the long-term control of GERD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 Forty-seven patients with GERD who underwent an endoscopic procedure were followed up for 60 months and evaluated for total response (RT), partial response (RP) and no response (SR) to endoscopic treatment with reintroduction of PPIs.

RESULTS

 Twenty-one patients received polymer injection (G0) and 26 endoluminal plication (G1). The number of patients with no response to endoscopic treatment with reintroduction of PPIs increased in time for both techniques (G0 P  = 0.006; G1 P  < 0.001). There was symptomatic improvement up to 12 months, with progressive loss of this trending up to 60 months in G0 and G1 ( P  < 0.001). Health-related quality of life score (GERD-HRQL) demonstrated TR in G0 and G1 at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. The 60-month analysis showed an increased number of patients with SR in both groups. The quality of life assessment (SF-36) showed benefit in G0 up to 3 months. G0 showed a higher rate of complications. There were no deaths. There was healing of esophagitis at 3 months in 45 % of patients in G0 and 40 % in G1. There was no improvement in manometric or pH findings.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic therapies were ineffective in controlling GERD in the long term.

Endoscopic treatment of refractory gastroesohageal reflux disease

Though efficient acid suppression with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) remains the mainstay of treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), some of the patients showed refractory response to PPIs, necessitating further intervention. After increasing dose of PPIs and other kinds of pharmacological intervention adopting prokinetics or others, variable endoscopic treatments are introduced for the treatment of these refractory cases. The detailed introduction regarding endoscopic treatment for GERD is forwarded in this review article. Implantation of reabsorbable or synthetic materials in the distal esophagus was tried in vain and is expelled from the market due to limited efficacy and serious complication. Radiofrequency energy delivery (Stretta) and transoral incisionless fundoplication (EsophyX) are actively tried currently.

Recent advances in endoscopic antireflux techniques

Heartburn is the most common symptom associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease, and life-long proton pump inhibitor therapy is often required to control symptoms. Antireflux surgery is an alternative, but there may be significant side effects and the duration of therapeutic effect is variable. Several endoscopic antireflux techniques (E-ARTs) have been developed to enhance the function of the lower esophageal sphincter or alter the structure of the angle of His with the goal of recreating or augmenting the reflux barrier. Many methods are no longer available, and some await regulatory approval. This article reviews available data for the most common E-ARTs.

Antireflux 'barriers': problems with patient recruitment for a new endoscopic antireflux procedure

BACKGROUND

Most first-generation endoscopic antireflux procedures (EARPs) have been withdrawn because of variable success rates, economic considerations, and/or complications. As a result, subsequent methods may meet 'skepticism' by physicians and patients.

AIMS

To identify potential barriers to patient recruitment for a new EARP METHODS: We prospectively analyzed our recruitment for a phase 2 study of a transoral incisionless fundoplication procedure. We contacted 50 private practices and 23 hospitals for potential referrals, and placed three newspaper advertisements. All patient replies were followed up by a phone call. Patients were then invited for a personal interview, and eligible patients underwent further preprocedure testing. In addition, poststudy questionnaires regarding their opinions about EARPs were sent to referring physicians.

RESULTS

Of 134 interviewed patients, only 10% (n=13) were successfully recruited. Candidates mostly responded to newspaper advertisements (87%) or were referred from our own institution (7%). Primary exclusion criteria included failure of proton pump inhibitor response (34%), lack of proton pump inhibitor use (20%), atypical symptoms (18%), or a large hiatal hernia (17%). Seventy percent of the responding physicians did not believe that new EARPs would be superior to previous methods.

CONCLUSION

The EARP market seems to be much smaller than anticipated, partially because of skepticism of referring physicians, and partially because of strict selection criteria.

Systematic review of endoscopic treatments for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

The aim of this review was to assess the safety and efficacy of endoscopic procedures for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

METHODS

Literature databases including Medline, Embase and PubMed were searched up to May 2006 without language restriction. Randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative studies with at least ten patients in each study arm, and case series studies of at least ten patients, were included.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies examining seven endoscopic procedures (Stretta procedure, Bard EndoCinch, Wilson-Cook Endoscopic Suturing Device, NDO Plicator, Enteryx, Gatekeeper Reflux Repair System and Plexiglas) were included in the review. Of the three procedures that were tested against sham controls (Stretta procedure, Bard EndoCinch and Enteryx), patient outcomes in the treatment group were either as good as, or significantly better than, those of control patients in terms of heartburn symptoms, quality of life and medication usage. However, for the two procedures that were tested against laparoscopic fundoplication (Stretta) procedure and Bard EndoCinch), outcomes for patients in the endoscopic group were either as good as, or inferior to, those for the laparoscopic group.

CONCLUSION

At present there is insufficient evidence to determine the safety and efficacy of endoscopic procedures for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, particularly in the long term.

Review article: endoscopic antireflux procedures - an unfulfilled promise?

BACKGROUND

Most published reviews concerning the endoscopic treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease date back to 2005.

AIM

To provide an updated review that includes all papers published up to 2007.

METHODS

A Medline search from January 2005 to June 2007 was performed regarding endoscopic procedures aiming at treating gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. In addition, we retrieved the abstracts presented at Digestive Disease Week during the last 3 years. We included in the review both 'mechanistic' studies - that is, papers exploring the potential mechanism of action of the procedure/device - and studies trying to assess its clinical efficacy.

RESULTS

During the last 3 years, the number of published papers has declined, and some devices are not available any more. The alleged mechanism(s) of action of the various devices or procedures is (are) still not completely elucidated; however, some concerns have arisen as far as durability and potential detrimental effects. Moreover, all the aspects of endoscopic therapy, except for its safety, are either insufficiently explored or not investigated at all, or assessed only in particularly selected patient subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the proposed antireflux therapies has fulfilled the criteria of efficacy, safety, cost, durability and, possibly, of reversibility. There is at present no definite indication for endoscopic therapy of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. We suggest a list of recommendations to be followed when a new endoscopic therapeutic procedure is to be assessed for use in clinical practice.

Review article: The endoscopic treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Over the last 10 years a number of endoscopic procedures for treating gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) have been developed (suturing, injections, implants and radiofrequency ablation), thus obviating the need for long-term proton pump inhibitors (PPI) and the potential morbidity of laparoscopic fundoplication.

AIM

To present an update of the literature studying the clinical efficacy of endoscopic antireflux procedures, and to discuss further developments.

METHODS

A PubMed search was performed for endoscopic suturing, antireflux treatment, endoscopic gastroplication, polymer injection, radiofrequency ablation of GORD. Own recent research was compared with existing data. Information concerning GORD endotherapy were gathered.

RESULTS

Uncontrolled studies have reported promising clinical results on the short to intermediate term for most endoscopic GORD procedures, but the placebo effect remained unknown. It is, therefore, commendable that the three main procedures (Endocinch, Stretta and Enteryx) have now all been tested against a sham procedure. Although all three techniques were able to improve symptoms, quality of life and PPI use, oesophageal acid reduction was unremarkable. Endocinch and Stretta are safe outpatient procedures. Concerns about the durability of Endocinch have risen. Polymer injection (Enteryx) and gel prosthesis implantation (Gatekeeper) were recalled for severe complications and lack of efficacy, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Endotherapy has shown the potential to treat (uncomplicated) GORD. However, some early procedures have failed or proven unsafe. Further developments and studies are necessary to determine what modifications to these techniques are required to produce optimal efficacy and durability. Until then, widespread clinical use of endotherapy for GORD should probably be avoided.

Systematic review: endoluminal therapy for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: evidence from clinical trials

During the last few decades many endoscopic interventions have been developed as an alternative for the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). In many countries, these interventions are thus being performed in the general clinical setting. The aim of this study is to systematically review the evidence on the effect of endoscopic therapies for GORD. A systematic search of the literature on this subject in English, indexed in MEDLINE (1966 to May 2007) and in the Cochrane Library, was carried out. For the study selection, retrospective and prospective open-label and randomized, sham-controlled trials were taken into account. The exclusion criteria included the following: case series that included fewer than 10 patients, abstracts, studies involving children or those with a follow-up shorter than 3 months. For data extraction, two reviewers, using standardized forms, independently abstracted data on study design and methods, population, sample size, function studies (e.g. pH-metry), type of endoscopic treatment, follow-up, health-related and quality of life scores, outcomes and complications. Data synthesis involved the following: 43 studies, including four randomized, sham-controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria, out of 4182 citations. The primary end point in most studies was the reduction of the use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) by more than 50%. In view of these findings, the majority of studies suggested the efficacy of endoluminal therapies for the control of symptoms in GORD. In the sham-controlled studies, the effect of placebo was, nevertheless, as high as 50%. Most studies were small feasibility studies, with follow-ups of less than 1 year. No study comparing endoscopic techniques with other established treatment options such as PPIs existed. All endoscopic therapies were associated with a small but important percentage of mild to severe complications, which included perforation, abscess and death. In conclusion, the data from most of the short-term follow-up and the few sham-controlled studies demonstrate that subgroups of patients experienced improvement or resolution of typical GORD symptoms and decreased PPI usage. Currently, however, there are not enough scientific and clinical data on safety, efficacy and durability to support the use of endoluminal therapies for GORD in routine clinical practice.

Endoluminal fundoplication

In GERD patients in whom pharmacological therapies are ineffective and anti-reflux surgery is not indicated, a viable option could be proposed. To date, several endoscopic antireflux procedures, involving sewing, injection and/or implant, and radiofrequency are available. The sewing techniques demonstrated good clinical results, with reduction in proton pump inhibitors consumption; despite significant changes in esophageal manometry and/or acid exposure time reduction and healing of esophagitis were noted only in few patients.

Clinical trials evaluating endoscopic GERD treatments: is it time for a moratorium on the clinical use of these procedures?

Perendoscopic treatments of gastroesophageal reflux have been used in clinical practice following FDA approval of the first two devices in 2000. A number of clinical trials predominantly short-term have been performed almost uniformly demonstrating patient improvement in GERD symptomatology and reduction or elimination of antacids. However, only two of these endo reflux treatment trials have included the essential elements of strict patient entry criteria, randomization, attempts at blending, and intention-to-treat analysis. Two new endoscopic antireflux trials are published in this issue of the journal. The first study compares the EndoCinch sewing device to the Enteryx copolymer injection procedure. The second report compares the EndoCinch technique to the laparoscopic fundoplication procedure. Unfortunately, both studies lack a sham-control population and have other important flaws in design. Basically, all these techniques improved GERD symptoms and well-being and decreased the patients PPI requirement during follow-up period. However, none of the endoscopic procedures reduced acid reflux impressively or improved lower esophageal sphincter tone, a consistent negative outcome with all these techniques. Morbidity was associated with all the procedures and Enteryx has been withdrawn recently from clinical use by the manufacturer because of significant complications. The efficacy durability and safety of these devices in treating GERD patients is in question. A moratorium on the continued use of the procedures in clinical practice seems appropriate at this time.