1
|
Wisniowski P, Putnam LR, Gallagher S, Rawal R, Houghton C, Lipham JC. Short term safety of magnetic sphincter augmentation vs minimally invasive fundoplication: an ACS-NSQIP analysis. Surg Endosc 2024; 38:1944-1949. [PMID: 38334778 PMCID: PMC10978616 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10672-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2023] [Accepted: 12/30/2023] [Indexed: 02/10/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation (MSA) is an FDA-approved anti-reflux procedure with comparable outcomes to fundoplication. However, most data regarding its use are limited to single or small multicenter studies which may limit the generalizability of its efficacy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of patients undergoing MSA vs fundoplication in a national database. MATERIALS AND METHODS The 2017-2020 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) Registry was utilized to evaluate patients undergoing MSA or fundoplication. Patients requiring Collis gastroplasty, paraesophageal hernia repair, and emergency cases, were excluded. Patient outcomes included overall complication rates, readmissions, reoperations, and mortality. RESULTS A total of 7,882 patients underwent MSA (n = 597) or fundoplication (n = 7285). MSA patients were younger (51 vs 57, p < 0.001), and more often male (49.6 vs 34.3%, p < 0.001). While patients undergoing MSA experienced similar rates of reoperation (1.0 vs 2.0%, p = 0.095), they experienced fewer readmissions (2.2 vs 4.7%, p = 0.005), complications (0.6 vs 4.0%, p < 0.001), shorter mean (SD) hospital length of stay(days) (0.4 ± 4.3 vs 1.8 ± 4.6, p < 0.001) and operative time(min) (80.8 ± 36.1 vs 118.7 ± 63.7, p < 0.001). Mortality was similar between groups (0 vs 0.3%, p = 0.175). On multivariable analysis, MSA was independently associated with reduced postoperative complications (OR 0.23, CI 0.08 to 0.61, p = 0.002), readmissions (OR 0.53, CI 0.30 to 0.94, p = 0.02), operative time (RC - 36.56, CI - 41.62 to - 31.49. p < 0.001) and length of stay (RC - 1.22, CI - 1.61 to - 0.84 p < 0.001). CONCLUSION In this national database study, compared to fundoplication MSA was associated with reduced postoperative complications, fewer readmissions, and shorter operative time and hospital length of stay. While randomized trials are lacking between MSA and fundoplication, both institutional and national database studies continue to support the use of MSA as a safe anti-reflux operation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Wisniowski
- Division of Upper GI and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Keck Medical Center of University of Southern California, 1510 San Pablo Street, HCC I, Suite 514, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA
| | - Luke R Putnam
- Division of Upper GI and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Keck Medical Center of University of Southern California, 1510 San Pablo Street, HCC I, Suite 514, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA
| | - Shea Gallagher
- Division of Upper GI and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Keck Medical Center of University of Southern California, 1510 San Pablo Street, HCC I, Suite 514, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA
| | - Rushil Rawal
- California University of Science and Medicine, Colton, CA, USA
| | - Caitlin Houghton
- Division of Upper GI and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Keck Medical Center of University of Southern California, 1510 San Pablo Street, HCC I, Suite 514, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA
| | - John C Lipham
- Division of Upper GI and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Keck Medical Center of University of Southern California, 1510 San Pablo Street, HCC I, Suite 514, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Nehra D, Clements CDM, Bezzaa SL, Tabbakh Y, Walsh CM. Patient-reported outcomes of laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2024; 106:344-352. [PMID: 37609688 PMCID: PMC10981991 DOI: 10.1308/rcsann.2023.0051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/19/2023] [Indexed: 08/24/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) is a chronic progressive disease, associated with substantial clinical and economic burden. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are considered first-line treatment; however, there are concerns around the long-term impact of their usage. Surgical treatment with Nissen fundoplication can be considered but, because of the potential side effects, few patients undergo surgery and there remains a substantial therapeutic gap within the current treatment pathway. Laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) using the LINX® device is an alternative surgical approach. METHODS The objective of this study was to investigate patient-reported outcomes following laparoscopic MSA surgery using the LINX® device in a UK setting. A retrospective questionnaire obtained data regarding postoperative symptoms, medication use and patient satisfaction. RESULTS Out of 131 patients surveyed, 97 responses were received, with a minimum follow-up time of 1 year. In those who reported heartburn and regurgitation preoperatively, improvement was reported in 93% (84/90) and 90% (86/96) of patients, respectively. Eighty-eight per cent (73/83) of patients were able to completely stop or reduce their medication by at least 75%. Seventy-seven per cent (73/95) of patients were "very satisfied" or "satisfied". CONCLUSIONS This study is the first to present patient-reported outcomes of MSA using the LINX® device for patients with GORD in the UK. It demonstrates that the device has favourable outcomes and could effectively bridge the current therapeutic gap that exists between PPI medication and Nissen fundoplication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Nehra
- Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK
| | - CDM Clements
- Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK
| | - SL Bezzaa
- Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Poola AS, Gatta P. Reoperative surgery after magnetic sphincter augmentation. Dis Esophagus 2023; 36:doad024. [PMID: 37317932 DOI: 10.1093/dote/doad024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2022] [Revised: 03/24/2023] [Accepted: 04/03/2023] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
Reoperative surgery following magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is rare. The clinical indications include the removal of MSA for dysphagia, the recurrence of reflux, or the issues of erosion. Diagnostic evaluation follows that of patients with recurrent reflux and dysphagia following surgical fundoplication. Procedures following the complications of MSA can be performed in a minimally invasive fashion, either endoscopically or robotic/laparoscopically, with good clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ashwini S Poola
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Health Systems, Mankato, MN, USA
| | - Prakash Gatta
- Department of Surgery, Overlake Medical Center, Bellevue, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Severe Dysphagia is Rare After Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation. World J Surg 2022; 46:2243-2250. [PMID: 35486162 PMCID: PMC9334408 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-022-06573-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/11/2022] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Dysphagia remains the most significant concern after anti-reflux surgery, including magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA). The aim of this study was to evaluate postoperative dysphagia rates, its risk factors, and management after MSA. METHODS From a prospectively collected database of all 357 patients that underwent MSA at our institution, a total of 268 patients were included in our retrospective study. Postoperative dysphagia score, gastrointestinal symptoms, proton pump inhibitor intake, GERD-HRQL, Alimentary Satisfaction, and serial contrast swallow imaging were evaluated within standardized follow-up appointments. To determine patients' characteristics and surgical factors associated with postoperative dysphagia, a multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 23 months, none of the patients presented with severe dysphagia, defined as the inability to swallow solids or/and liquids. 1% of the patients underwent endoscopic dilatation, and 1% had been treated conservatively for dysphagia. 2% of the patients needed re-operation, most commonly due to recurrent hiatal hernia. Two patients underwent device removal due to unspecific discomfort and pain. No migration of the device or erosion by the device was seen. The LINX® device size ≤ 13 was found to be the only factor associated with postoperative dysphagia (OR 5.90 (95% CI 1.4-24.8)). The postoperative total GERD-HRQL score was significantly lower than preoperative total score (2 vs. 19; p = 0.001), and daily heartburn, regurgitations, and respiratory complains improved in 228/241 (95%), 131/138 (95%) and 92/97 (95%) of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Dysphagia requiring endoscopic or surgical intervention was rare after MSA in a large case series. LINX® devices with a size < 13 were shown to be an independent risk factor for developing postoperative dysphagia.
Collapse
|
5
|
Magnetic sphincter augmentation device removal: surgical technique and results at medium-term follow-up. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2021; 406:2545-2551. [PMID: 34462810 PMCID: PMC8578182 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-021-02294-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2021] [Accepted: 08/03/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Background The magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) device has become a common option for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Knowledge of MSA-related complications, indications for removal, and techniques are puzzled. With this study, we aimed to evaluate indications, techniques for removal, surgical approach, and outcomes with MSA removal. Methods This is an observational singe-center study. Patients were followed up regularly with endoscopy, pH monitoring, and assessed for specific gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) and generic short-form 36 (SF-36) quality of life. Results Five patients underwent MSA explant. Four patients were males and the median age was 47 years (range 44–55). Heartburn, epigastric/chest pain, and dysphagia were commonly reported. The median implant duration was 46 months (range 31–72). A laparoscopic approach was adopted in all patients. Intraoperative findings included normal anatomy (40%), herniation in the mediastinum (40%), and erosion (20%). The most common anti-reflux procedures were Dor (n = 2), Toupet (n = 2), and anterior partial fundoplication (n = 1). The median operative time was 145 min (range 60–185), and the median hospital length of stay was 4 days (range 3–6). The median postoperative follow-up was 41 months (range 12–51). At the last follow-up, 80% of patients were off PPI; the GERD-HRQL and SF-36 questionnaire were improved with DeMeester score and esophageal acid exposure normalization. Conclusion The MSA device can be safely explanted through a single-stage laparoscopic procedure. Tailoring a fundoplication, according to preoperative patient symptoms and intraoperative findings, seems feasible and safe with a promising trend toward improved symptoms and quality of life. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00423-021-02294-7.
Collapse
|
6
|
Rameau A, Andreadis K, Bayoumi A, Kaufman M, Belafsky P. Side Effects of Proton Pump Inhibitors: What are Patients’ Concerns? J Voice 2021; 35:809.e15-809.e20. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.01.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2019] [Revised: 01/15/2020] [Accepted: 01/17/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
|
7
|
Wahi JE, Le C, Yousef M, Hernandez E, Stickles MG, Ben-David K. Robotic LINX Placement: Is it Worth It? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2021; 31:526-529. [PMID: 33784476 DOI: 10.1089/lap.2021.0103] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication is considered the current gold standard of surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Magnetic sphincter augmentation with the LINX® device was developed as a less technically challenging alternative that has proven to be a safe and effective surgical antireflux procedure. Despite rapid adoption of the robotic platform in many areas of general surgery, no studies have compared laparoscopic and robotic approaches to placement of the LINX device. This retrospective study is the first to compare the robotic platform with the laparoscopic approach for minimally invasive LINX placement. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of a total cohort of 20 patients who underwent LINX placement with hiatal hernia repair at our institution. Half of the patients underwent surgery using laparoscopy and the other half with robotic technology. Patient characteristics, surgical outcomes, and charge differences were analyzed. Results: We found that there were no significant differences in hospital length of stay, surgical outcomes, use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) postoperatively, or postoperative dysphagia. Patients undergoing robotic surgery had longer operative time (139 ± 25 minutes versus 81 ± 14 minutes, P < .01), higher intraoperative charges ($8980 ± 275 versus $7239 ± 355, P < .01), and higher charges associated with their hospital stay ($45,037 ± 4112.41 versus $39,565 ± 3731.64, P < .01). Conclusions: In comparison with laparoscopic LINX procedures, robotic LINX does not offer superior surgical outcomes in terms of postoperative PPI use, dysphagia, or hospital length of stay. Robotic LINX procedures are associated with increased operative time and overall charges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica Emilia Wahi
- Department of Surgery, Mount Sinai Medical Center (MSMC), Miami Beach, Florida, USA
| | - Christopher Le
- Department of Surgery, Mount Sinai Medical Center (MSMC), Miami Beach, Florida, USA
| | - Michael Yousef
- Finance and Resource Management, MSMC, Miami Beach, Florida, USA
| | | | | | - Kfir Ben-David
- Department of Surgery, Mount Sinai Medical Center (MSMC), Miami Beach, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Huynh P, Konda V, Sanguansataya S, Ward MA, Leeds SG. Mind the Gap: Current Treatment Alternatives for GERD Patients Failing Medical Treatment and Not Ready for a Fundoplication. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2020; 31:264-276. [PMID: 33347088 PMCID: PMC8154178 DOI: 10.1097/sle.0000000000000888] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2020] [Accepted: 10/05/2020] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Gastroesophageal reflux disease is associated with Barrett esophagus, esophageal adenocarcinoma, and significantly impacts quality of life. Medical management is the first line therapy with surgical fundoplication as an alternative therapy. However, a small portion of patients who fail medical therapy are referred for surgical consultation. This creates a "gap" in therapy for those patients dissatisfied with medical therapy but are not getting referred for surgical consultation. Three procedures have been designed to address these patients. These include radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the lower esophageal sphincter, transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF), and magnetic sphincter augmentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS A Pubmed literature review was conducted of all publications for RFA, TIF, and MSA. Four most common endpoints for the 3 procedures were compared at different intervals of follow-up. These include percent of patients off proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), GERD-HRQL score, DeMeester score, and percent of time with pH <4. A second query was performed for patients treated with PPI and fundoplications to match the same 4 endpoints as a control. RESULTS Variable freedom from PPI was reported at 1 year for RFA with a weighted mean of 62%, TIF with a weighted mean of 61%, MSA with a weighted mean of 85%, and fundoplications with a weighted mean of 84%. All procedures including PPIs improved quality-of-life scores but were not equal. Fundoplication had the best improvement followed by MSA, TIF, RFA, and PPI, respectively. DeMeester scores are variable after all procedures and PPIs. All MSA studies showed normalization of pH, whereas only 4 of 17 RFA studies and 3 of 11 TIF studies reported normalization of pH. CONCLUSIONS Our literature review compares 3 rival procedures to treat "gap" patients for gastroesophageal reflux disease with 4 common endpoints. Magnetic sphincter augmentation appears to have the most reproducible and linear outcomes but is the most invasive of the 3 procedures. MSA outcomes most closely mirrors that of fundoplication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Phuong Huynh
- Division of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Baylor University Medical Center
- Center for Advanced Surgery, Baylor Scott & White Health
| | - Vani Konda
- Center for Esophageal Diseases, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas
| | | | - Marc A. Ward
- Division of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Baylor University Medical Center
- Center for Advanced Surgery, Baylor Scott & White Health
- Texas A&M College of Medicine, Bryan, TX
| | - Steven G. Leeds
- Division of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Baylor University Medical Center
- Center for Advanced Surgery, Baylor Scott & White Health
- Texas A&M College of Medicine, Bryan, TX
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Magnetic sphincter augmentation with hiatal hernia repair: long term outcomes. Surg Endosc 2020; 35:5607-5612. [DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-08063-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2020] [Accepted: 09/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
|
10
|
DeMeester SR. Laparoscopic Hernia Repair and Fundoplication for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2020; 30:309-324. [PMID: 32146948 DOI: 10.1016/j.giec.2019.12.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
Antireflux surgery is challenging, and has become even more challenging with the introduction of alternative endoscopic and laparoscopic options for patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The Nissen fundoplication remains the gold standard for the durable relief of GERD symptoms and esophagitis. All antireflux procedures have a failure rate, and it is important to minimize factors that are associated with failure. The selection of patients for antireflux surgery as well as the choice of the procedure requires a thorough understanding of esophageal physiology and the pros and cons of various options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven R DeMeester
- Thoracic and Foregut Surgery, General and Minimally Invasive Surgery, The Oregon Clinic, 4805 Northeast Glisan Street, Suite 6N60, Portland, OR 97213, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Kirkham EN, Main BG, Jones KJB, Blazeby JM, Blencowe NS. Systematic review of the introduction and evaluation of magnetic augmentation of the lower oesophageal sphincter for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Br J Surg 2019; 107:44-55. [PMID: 31800095 PMCID: PMC6972716 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11391] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2019] [Revised: 08/13/2019] [Accepted: 09/11/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is reported to be an innovative alternative to antireflux surgery for patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Although used in practice, little is known about how it has been evaluated. This study aimed to systematically summarize and appraise the reporting of MSA and its introduction into clinical practice, in the context of guidelines (such as IDEAL) for evaluating innovative surgical devices. METHODS Systematic searches were used to identify all published studies reporting MSA insertion. Data collected included patient selection, governance arrangements, surgeon expertise, technique description and outcome reporting. RESULTS Searches identified 587 abstracts; 39 full-text papers were included (1 RCT 5 cohort, 3 case-control, 25 case series, 5 case reports). Twenty-one followed US Food and Drug Administration eligibility criteria for MSA insertion. Twenty-six documented that ethical approval was obtained. Two reported that participating surgeons received training in MSA; 18 provided information about how MSA insertion was performed, although techniques varied between studies. Follow-up ranged from 4 weeks to 5 years; in 14 studies, it was less than 1 year. CONCLUSION Most studies on MSA lacked information about patient selection, governance, expertise, techniques and outcomes, or varied between studies. Currently, MSA is being used despite a lack of robust evidence for its effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E N Kirkham
- Conformité Européenne Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Gloucester, UK.,Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
| | - B G Main
- Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK.,National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol, UK.,Conformité Européenne University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
| | - K J B Jones
- Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
| | - J M Blazeby
- Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK.,National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol, UK.,Conformité Européenne University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
| | - N S Blencowe
- Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK.,National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol, UK.,Conformité Européenne University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Ayazi S, Zaidi AH, Zheng P, Chovanec K, Chowdhury N, Salvitti M, Newhams K, Levy J, Hoppo T, Jobe BA. Comparison of surgical payer costs and implication on the healthcare expenses between laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) and laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) in a large healthcare system. Surg Endosc 2019; 34:2279-2286. [PMID: 31376004 PMCID: PMC7113225 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-07021-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2019] [Accepted: 07/19/2019] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
Introduction Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is a promising antireflux surgical treatment. The cost associated with the device may be perceived as a drawback by payers, which may limit the adoption of this technique. There are limited data regarding the cost of MSA in the management of reflux disease. The aims of the study were to report the clinical outcome and quality of life measures in patients after MSA and to compare the pharmaceutical and procedure payer costs and the disease-related and overall expense of MSA compared to laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) from a payer perspective. Methods and procedures This prospective observational study was performed in conjunction with the region’s largest health insurance company. Data were collected on patients who underwent MSA over a 2-year period beginning in September 2015 at the study network hospitals. The LNF comparison group was procured from members’ claims data of the payer. Inclusion was predicated by patients having continuous coverage during study period. The total procedural reimbursement and the disease-related and overall medical claims submitted up to 12 months prior to surgery and up to 12 months following surgery were obtained. The payer reimbursement data are presented as allowed cost per member per month (PMPM). These values were then compared between groups. Results There were 195 patients who underwent MSA and 1131 that had LNF. MSA results in comparable symptom control, PPI elimination rate, and quality of life measures compared to values reported for LNF in the literature. The median (IQR) reimbursement of surgery was $13,522 (13,195–14,439) for those who underwent MSA and $13,388 (9951–16,261) for patients with LNF, p = 0.02. In patients who underwent MSA, the median reimbursement related to the upper gastrointestinal disease was $ 305 PMPM, at 12 months prior to surgery and $ 104 at 12 months after surgery, representing 66% decrease in cost. These values were $ 233 PMPM and $126 PMPM for patients who underwent LNF, representing a 46% decrease (p = 0.0001). At 12 months following surgery, the reimbursement for overall medical expenses had decreased by 10.7% in the MSA group and 1.4% in the LNF group when compared to the preoperative baseline reimbursement. The reimbursement for PPI use after surgery showed a 95% decrease in the MSA group and 90% among LNF group when compared to the preoperative baseline (p = 0.10). Conclusion When compared with LNF, MSA results in a reduction of disease-related expenses for the payer in the year following surgery. While MSA is associated with a higher procedural payer cost compared to LNF, payer costs may offset due to reduction in the expenses after surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shahin Ayazi
- Esophageal and Lung Institute, Allegheny Health Network, 4815 Liberty Avenue, Suite 439, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA
| | - Ali H Zaidi
- Esophageal and Lung Institute, Allegheny Health Network, 4815 Liberty Avenue, Suite 439, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA
| | - Ping Zheng
- Esophageal and Lung Institute, Allegheny Health Network, 4815 Liberty Avenue, Suite 439, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA
| | - Kristy Chovanec
- Esophageal and Lung Institute, Allegheny Health Network, 4815 Liberty Avenue, Suite 439, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA
| | - Nobel Chowdhury
- Esophageal and Lung Institute, Allegheny Health Network, 4815 Liberty Avenue, Suite 439, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA
| | - Madison Salvitti
- Esophageal and Lung Institute, Allegheny Health Network, 4815 Liberty Avenue, Suite 439, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA
| | - Kirsten Newhams
- Esophageal and Lung Institute, Allegheny Health Network, 4815 Liberty Avenue, Suite 439, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA
| | - Jonathan Levy
- Esophageal and Lung Institute, Allegheny Health Network, 4815 Liberty Avenue, Suite 439, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA
| | - Toshitaka Hoppo
- Esophageal and Lung Institute, Allegheny Health Network, 4815 Liberty Avenue, Suite 439, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA
| | - Blair A Jobe
- Esophageal and Lung Institute, Allegheny Health Network, 4815 Liberty Avenue, Suite 439, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Hawasli A, Sadoun M, Meguid A, Dean M, Sahly M, Hawasli B. Laparoscopic placement of the LINX ® system in management of severe reflux after sleeve gastrectomy. Am J Surg 2018; 217:496-499. [PMID: 30390937 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.10.040] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2018] [Revised: 10/21/2018] [Accepted: 10/24/2018] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Management of severe reflux after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is often done by conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). The LINX® system could be an alternative treatment. METHOD Between 2015 and 2017, 13 patients had LINX® system placed to manage their reflux after SG. Pre-operative evaluation included a barium swallow, endoscopy with pH monitor and esophageal motility. RESULTS Ten females and three males with mean age of 49 ± 13 years were evaluated. Their mean weight before placing the LINX® system was 193 ± 45 lbs. and mean BMI of 33 ± 6 kg/m2. The mean time between SG and placing the LINX® system was 43 ± 19 months. The mean Bravo score was 46 ± 26 (normal 14.7). One patient developed severe dysphagia post-operatively requiring removal of the LINX® after 18 days and one patient was lost to follow up. The mean follow-up in the remaining 11 patients was 26 ± 12 months. The mean GERD-HRQL score dropped significantly from 47/75 ± 17/75 to 12/75 ± 14/75 (p = .0003). CONCLUSION The LINX® system may be used as an alternative to RYGB conversion in managing refractory post-SG reflux.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ahmed Meguid
- St. John Hospital and Medical Center, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Mosab Dean
- St. John Hospital and Medical Center, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Mohamad Sahly
- St. John Hospital and Medical Center, Detroit, MI, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Alicuben ET, Bell RCW, Jobe BA, Buckley FP, Daniel Smith C, Graybeal CJ, Lipham JC. Worldwide Experience with Erosion of the Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation Device. J Gastrointest Surg 2018; 22:1442-1447. [PMID: 29667094 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-018-3775-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2018] [Accepted: 04/03/2018] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The magnetic sphincter augmentation device continues to become a more common antireflux surgical option with low complication rates. Erosion into the esophagus is an important complication to recognize and is reported to occur at very low incidences (0.1-0.15%). Characterization of this complication remains limited. We aim to describe the worldwide experience with erosion of the magnetic sphincter augmentation device including presentation, techniques for removal, and possible risk factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS We reviewed data obtained from the device manufacturer Torax Medical, Inc., as well as the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. The study period was from February 2007 through July 2017 and included all devices placed worldwide. RESULTS In total, 9453 devices were placed and there were 29 reported cases of erosions. The median time to presentation of an erosion was 26 months with most occurring between 1 and 4 years after placement. The risk of erosion was 0.3% at 4 years after device implantation. Most patients experienced new-onset dysphagia prompting evaluation. Devices were successfully removed in all patients most commonly via an endoscopic removal of the eroded portion followed by a delayed laparoscopic removal of the remaining beads. At a median follow-up of 58 days post-removal, there were no complications and 24 patients have returned to baseline. Four patients reported ongoing mild dysphagia. CONCLUSIONS Erosion of the LINX device is an important but rare complication to recognize that has been safely managed via minimally invasive approaches without long-term consequences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Evan T Alicuben
- Department of Surgery, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, 1510 San Pablo St. #514, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA
| | | | - Blair A Jobe
- Esophageal and Lung Institute, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - F P Buckley
- Foregut & Reflux Surgery, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas-Austin, Austin, TX, USA
| | | | - Casey J Graybeal
- The Heartburn and Swallowing Center, Northeast Georgia Physicians Group, Gainesville, GA, USA
| | - John C Lipham
- Department of Surgery, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, 1510 San Pablo St. #514, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Sigakis CJG, Mathai SK, Suby-Long TD, Restauri NL, Ocazionez D, Bang TJ, Restrepo CS, Sachs PB, Vargas D. Radiographic Review of Current Therapeutic and Monitoring Devices in the Chest. Radiographics 2018; 38:1027-1045. [PMID: 29906203 DOI: 10.1148/rg.2018170096] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
Chest radiographs are obtained as a standard part of clinical care. Rapid advancements in medical technology have resulted in a myriad of new medical devices, and familiarity with their imaging appearance is a critical yet increasingly difficult endeavor. Many modern thoracic medical devices are new renditions of old designs and are often smaller than older versions. In addition, multiple device designs serving the same purpose may have varying morphologies and positions within the chest. The radiologist must be able to recognize and correctly identify the proper positioning of state-of-the-art medical devices and identify any potential complications that could impact patient care and management. To familiarize radiologists with the arsenal of newer thoracic medical devices, this review describes the indications, radiologic appearance, complications, and magnetic resonance imaging safety of each device. ©RSNA, 2018.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher J G Sigakis
- From the Departments of Radiology (C.J.G.S., T.D.S.L., N.L.R., T.J.B., P.B.S., D.V.) and Medicine (S.K.M.), University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, 12401 E 17th Ave, Room L517, Aurora, CO 80045; Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Tex (D.O.); and Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex (C.S.R.)
| | - Susan K Mathai
- From the Departments of Radiology (C.J.G.S., T.D.S.L., N.L.R., T.J.B., P.B.S., D.V.) and Medicine (S.K.M.), University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, 12401 E 17th Ave, Room L517, Aurora, CO 80045; Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Tex (D.O.); and Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex (C.S.R.)
| | - Thomas D Suby-Long
- From the Departments of Radiology (C.J.G.S., T.D.S.L., N.L.R., T.J.B., P.B.S., D.V.) and Medicine (S.K.M.), University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, 12401 E 17th Ave, Room L517, Aurora, CO 80045; Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Tex (D.O.); and Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex (C.S.R.)
| | - Nicole L Restauri
- From the Departments of Radiology (C.J.G.S., T.D.S.L., N.L.R., T.J.B., P.B.S., D.V.) and Medicine (S.K.M.), University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, 12401 E 17th Ave, Room L517, Aurora, CO 80045; Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Tex (D.O.); and Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex (C.S.R.)
| | - Daniel Ocazionez
- From the Departments of Radiology (C.J.G.S., T.D.S.L., N.L.R., T.J.B., P.B.S., D.V.) and Medicine (S.K.M.), University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, 12401 E 17th Ave, Room L517, Aurora, CO 80045; Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Tex (D.O.); and Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex (C.S.R.)
| | - Tami J Bang
- From the Departments of Radiology (C.J.G.S., T.D.S.L., N.L.R., T.J.B., P.B.S., D.V.) and Medicine (S.K.M.), University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, 12401 E 17th Ave, Room L517, Aurora, CO 80045; Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Tex (D.O.); and Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex (C.S.R.)
| | - Carlos S Restrepo
- From the Departments of Radiology (C.J.G.S., T.D.S.L., N.L.R., T.J.B., P.B.S., D.V.) and Medicine (S.K.M.), University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, 12401 E 17th Ave, Room L517, Aurora, CO 80045; Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Tex (D.O.); and Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex (C.S.R.)
| | - Peter B Sachs
- From the Departments of Radiology (C.J.G.S., T.D.S.L., N.L.R., T.J.B., P.B.S., D.V.) and Medicine (S.K.M.), University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, 12401 E 17th Ave, Room L517, Aurora, CO 80045; Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Tex (D.O.); and Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex (C.S.R.)
| | - Daniel Vargas
- From the Departments of Radiology (C.J.G.S., T.D.S.L., N.L.R., T.J.B., P.B.S., D.V.) and Medicine (S.K.M.), University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, 12401 E 17th Ave, Room L517, Aurora, CO 80045; Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Tex (D.O.); and Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex (C.S.R.)
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Ganz RA. A Modern Magnetic Implant for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 15:1326-1337. [PMID: 28025156 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.12.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2016] [Revised: 11/18/2016] [Accepted: 12/14/2016] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
A magnetic implant for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) was Food and Drug Administration-approved in 2012 and has been extensively evaluated. The device is a ring of magnets that are placed around the gastroesophageal junction, augmenting the native lower esophageal sphincter and preventing reflux yet preserving lower esophageal sphincter physiologic function and allowing belching and vomiting. Magnetic force is advantageous, being permanent and precise, and forces between magnets decrease with esophageal displacement. Multiple patient cohorts have been studied using the magnetic device, and trials establish consistent, long-term improvement in pH data, GERD symptom scores, and proton-pump inhibitor use. A 5-year Food and Drug Administration trial demonstrated that most patients achieved normal pH scores, 85% stopped proton-pump inhibitors, and GERD health-related quality of life symptom scores improved from 27 to 4 at 5 years. Seven studies have compared magnetic augmentation with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication and demonstrated that the magnetic device achieved comparable efficacy with regard to proton-pump inhibitor cessation, GERD symptom score improvement, and heartburn and regurgitation scores. However, to date there have been no randomized, controlled trials comparing the 2 techniques, and the study cohorts are not necessarily comparable regarding hiatal hernia size, severity of reflux, body mass index scores, or esophagitis scores. Dysphagia incidence was similar in both groups. Reoperation rates and safety profiles were also comparable, but the magnetic device demonstrated significant beneficial differences in allowing belching and vomiting. The magnetic device is safe, with the main adverse event being dysphagia with an approximate 3%-5% chronic incidence. Device removals in clinical trials have been between 0% and 7% and were uneventful. There have been no erosions, perforations, or infections in FDA clinical trials; erosions have rarely been noted in practice. Magnetic augmentation of the lower esophageal sphincter is a safe and effective operation for GERD, and should be considered a surgical option for those seeking a fundic-sparing operation, particularly those with parameters consistent with study cohorts. Additional randomized, controlled trials are underway.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert A Ganz
- Minnesota Gastroenterology, PA, Plymouth, Minnesota; Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Abbott-Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
SAGES technology and value assessment committee (TAVAC) safety and effectiveness analysis: LINX ® reflux management system. Surg Endosc 2017; 31:3811-3826. [PMID: 28842765 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-017-5813-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2017] [Accepted: 07/31/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
|
18
|
Efficacy of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation versus Nissen Fundoplication for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Short Term: A Meta-Analysis. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 2017:9596342. [PMID: 28466002 PMCID: PMC5390656 DOI: 10.1155/2017/9596342] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2017] [Accepted: 03/20/2017] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background. The efficacy of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation (MSA) and its outcomes for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) are uncertain. Therefore, we aimed to summarize and analyze the efficacy of two treatments for GERD. Methods. The meta-analysis search was performed, using four databases. All studies from 2005 to 2016 were included. Pooled effect was calculated using either the fixed or random effects model. Results. A total of 4 trials included 624 patients and aimed to evaluate the differences in proton-pump inhibitor use, complications, and adverse events. MSA had a shorter operative time (MSA and NF: RR = -18.80, 95% CI: -24.57 to -13.04, and P = 0.001) and length of stay (RR = -14.21, 95% CI: -24.18 to -4.23, and P = 0.005). Similar proton-pump inhibitor use, complication (P = 0.19), and severe dysphagia for dilation were shown in both groups. Although there is no difference between the MSA and NF in the number of adverse events, the incidence of postoperative gas or bloating (RR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54-0.94, and P = 0.02) showed significantly different results. However, there is no significant difference in ability to belch and ability to vomit. Conclusions. MSA can be recommended as an alternative treatment for GERD according to their short-term studies, especially in main-features of gas-bloating, due to shorter operative time and less complication of gas or bloating.
Collapse
|
19
|
Hawasli A, Tarakji M, Tarboush M. Laparoscopic management of severe reflux after sleeve gastrectomy using the LINX ® system: Technique and one year follow up case report. Int J Surg Case Rep 2016; 30:148-151. [PMID: 28012332 PMCID: PMC5192038 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2016.11.050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2016] [Revised: 11/26/2016] [Accepted: 11/27/2016] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Management of severe reflux after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) usually requires converting to Roux-en-y gastric bypass (RYGB). We present a case of managing this problem using the LINX® system. PRESENTATION OF CASE In February 2015, we performed a laparoscopic placement of LINX® system to treat severe reflux after sleeve gastrectomy on a 25-year-old female. The operative time was 47min. There were no intra or postoperative complications. The hospital stay was one day. The postoperative UGI showed no reflux. Ten days after surgery her Quality of life score (QOL) changed from 64/75 to 7/75 after the LINX® placement. One year later the patient continued to enjoy no reflux and stayed off medication. DISCUSSION Reflux after sleeve gastrectomy is usually managed by conversion to RYGB by most surgeons. This case report opens the door for an alternative management of this problem while maintaining the original sleeve gastrectomy. This technique is reasonably easy to perform in comparison to the conversion to RYGB with less potential post-operative complications. A one year follow up showed good control of reflux without medication. CONCLUSION Laparoscopic placement of the LINX® system to correct severe reflux after sleeve gastrectomy is a safe alternative procedure to conversion to a RYGB.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abdelkader Hawasli
- Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery, St. John Hospital & Medical Center, Detroit, MI, United States.
| | - Mark Tarakji
- Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery, St. John Hospital & Medical Center, Detroit, MI, United States
| | - Moayad Tarboush
- Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery, St. John Hospital & Medical Center, Detroit, MI, United States
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Abdel Jalil AA, Castell DO. Ineffective Esophageal Motility (IEM): the Old-New Frontier in Esophagology. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 2016; 18:1. [PMID: 26685862 DOI: 10.1007/s11894-015-0472-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is characterized by distal esophageal contraction amplitude of <30 mmHg on conventional manometry (Blonski et al. Am J Gastroenterol. 103(3):699-704, 2008), or a distal contractile integral (DCI) < 450 mmHg*s*cm on high-resolution manometry (HRM) (Kahrilas et al. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 27(2):160-74, 2015) in≥50 % of test swallows. IEM is the most common abnormality on esophageal manometry, with an estimated prevalence of 20-30 % (Tutuian and Castell Am J Gastroenterol. 99(6):1011-9, 2004; Conchillo et al. Am J Gastroenterol. 100(12):2624-32, 2005). Non-obstructive dysphagia has been considered to be frequently associated with severe esophageal peristaltic dysfunction. Defective bolus transit (DBT) on multichannel intraluminal impedance testing was found in more than half of IEM patients who presented with dysphagia (Tutuian and Castell Am J Gastroenterol. 99(6):1011-9, 2004), highlighting the functional defect of this manometric finding. Treatment of IEM has been challenging because of lack of promotility agents that have a definite effect on esophageal function.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ala' A Abdel Jalil
- Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Missouri-Columbia, One Hospital Dr., CE 405, Columbia, MO, 65212, USA.
| | - Donald O Castell
- Esophageal Disorders Program, Gastroenterology & Hepatology Division, Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC), 114 Doughty St. Suite 249, MSC 702, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Scarpellini E, Ang D, Pauwels A, De Santis A, Vanuytsel T, Tack J. Management of refractory typical GERD symptoms. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 13:281-94. [PMID: 27075264 DOI: 10.1038/nrgastro.2016.50] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
The management of patients with refractory GERD (rGERD) is a major clinical challenge for gastroenterologists. In up to 30% of patients with typical GERD symptoms (heartburn and/or regurgitation), acid-suppressive therapy does not provide clinical benefit. In this Review, we discuss the current management algorithm for GERD and the features and management of patients who do not respond to treatment (such as those individuals with an incorrect diagnosis of GERD, inadequate PPI intake, persisting acid reflux and persisting weakly acidic reflux). Symptom response to existing surgical techniques, novel antireflux procedures, and the value of add-on medical therapies (including prokinetics and reflux inhibitors) for rGERD symptoms are discussed. Pharmaceutical agents targeting oesophageal sensitivity, a condition that can contribute to symptom generation in rGERD, are also discussed. Finally, on the basis of available published data and our expert opinion, we present an outline of a current, usable algorithm for management of patients with rGERD that considers the timing and diagnostic use of pH-impedance monitoring on or off PPI, additional diagnostic tests, the clinical use of baclofen and the use of add-on neuromodulators (tricyclic agents and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emidio Scarpellini
- Translational Research in Gastrointestinal Disorders (TARGID), University of Leuven, Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium.,Division Gastroenterology, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico 155, 00100, Rome, Italy
| | - Daphne Ang
- Division of Gastroenterology, Changi General Hospital, 2 Simei Street 3, Singapore 529889
| | - Ans Pauwels
- Translational Research in Gastrointestinal Disorders (TARGID), University of Leuven, Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
| | - Adriano De Santis
- Division of Gastroenterology, Changi General Hospital, 2 Simei Street 3, Singapore 529889
| | - Tim Vanuytsel
- Translational Research in Gastrointestinal Disorders (TARGID), University of Leuven, Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
| | - Jan Tack
- Translational Research in Gastrointestinal Disorders (TARGID), University of Leuven, Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Lower Esophageal Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation for Persistent Reflux After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass. Obes Surg 2015; 26:464-6. [DOI: 10.1007/s11695-015-1990-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
|
23
|
Revaluation of the efficacy of magnetic sphincter augmentation for treating gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Endosc 2015; 30:3684-90. [PMID: 26659236 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4701-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/12/2015] [Accepted: 11/18/2015] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a prevalent disease which severely impacts the quality of life of the patients. The surgical options are limited to such patients who are not satisfied with medical therapies. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is a new antireflux surgical technique for treating GERD, which could physiologically reinforce the lower esophageal sphincter by magnetic force. Many clinical and animal studies have focused on this new therapy. The purpose of this work was to review the feasibility, efficacy and safety of MSA as a new treatment for GERD. METHODS We performed a PubMed database search for the MSA and GERD-related studies between 2008 and September 22, 2015. One animal study, two case reports and fifteen clinical studies were identified in this review. RESULTS The MSA device reinforces the lower esophageal sphincter to antireflux via magnetic force. The feasibility of this laparoscopic technique has been proved by the experimental and clinical studies. The clinical studies demonstrate that MSA treatment could effectively reduce the percent time of esophageal acid exposure (pH < 4) and improve the GERD health-related quality of life score. The operation time of MSA is shorter than that of the Nissen fundoplication, and the efficacy of MSA treatment is equal to that of fundoplication. The most frequent postoperative complication is dysphagia, and the majority of them could be self-resolved with conservative treatment. CONCLUSION MSA (or LINX) devices provide an alternative surgical option for the patients who had failed in medical therapy. This review of the current literatures demonstrates that MSA is as effective as the medical and conventional surgical therapies. In the future, MSA will play a more important role in the treatment of GERD because of its unique advantage.
Collapse
|
24
|
Charges, outcomes, and complications: a comparison of magnetic sphincter augmentation versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for the treatment of GERD. Surg Endosc 2015; 30:3225-30. [PMID: 26541730 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4635-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2015] [Accepted: 10/17/2015] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is approved for uncomplicated GERD. Multiple studies have shown MSA to compare favorably to laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) in terms of symptom control with results out to 5 years. The MSA device itself, however, is an added cost to an anti-reflux surgery, and direct cost comparison studies have not been done between MSA and LNF. The aim of the study was to compare charges, complications, and outcome of MSA versus LNF at 1 year. METHODS This is a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent MSA or LNF for the treatment of GERD between January 2010 and June 2013. Patient charges were collected for the surgical admission. We also collected data on 30-day complications and symptom control at 1 year assessed by GERD-HRQL score and PPI use. RESULTS There were 119 patients included in the study, 52 MSA and 67 LNF. There was no significant difference between the mean charges for MSA and LNF ($48,491 vs. $50,111, p = 0.506). There were significant differences in OR time (66 min MSA vs. 82 min LNF, p < 0.01) and LOS (17 h MSA vs. 38 h LNF, p < 0.01). At 1-year follow-up, mean GERD-HRQL was 4.3 for MSA versus 5.1 for LNF (p = 0.47) and 85 % of MSA patients versus 92 % of LNF patients were free from PPIs (p = 0.37). MSA patients reported less gas bloat symptoms (23 vs. 53 %, p ≤ 0.01) and inability to belch (10 vs. 36 %, p ≤ 0.01) and vomit (4 vs. 19 %, p ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSION The side effect profile of MSA is better than LNF as evidenced by less gas bloat and increase ability to belch and vomit. LNF and MSA are comparable in symptom control, safety, and overall hospital charges. The charge for the MSA device is offset by less charges in other categories as a result of the shorter operative time and LOS.
Collapse
|
25
|
Desart K, Rossidis G, Michel M, Lux T, Ben-David K. Gastroesophageal Reflux Management with the LINX® System for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Following Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 2015; 19:1782-6. [PMID: 26162926 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-015-2887-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 65] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2015] [Accepted: 06/29/2015] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has gained significant popularity in the USA, and consequently resulted in patients experiencing new-onset gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) following this bariatric procedure. Patients with GERD refractory to medical therapy present a more challenging situation limiting the surgical options to further treat the de novo GERD symptoms since the gastric fundus to perform a fundoplication is no longer an option. OBJECTIVES The aim of this study is to determine if the LINX® magnetic sphincter augmentation system is a safe and effective option for patients with new gastroesophageal reflux disease following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. SETTINGS This study was conducted at the University Medical Center. METHODS This is a retrospective review of seven consecutive patients who had a laparoscopic LINX® magnetic sphincter device placement for patients with refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy between July 2014 and April 2015. RESULTS All patients were noted to have self-reported greatly improved gastroesophageal reflux symptoms 2-4 weeks after their procedure. They were all noted to have statistically significant improved severity and frequency of their reflux, regurgitation, epigastric pain, sensation of fullness, dysphagia, and cough symptoms in their postoperative GERD symptoms compared with their preoperative evaluation. CONCLUSION This is the first reported pilot case series, illustrating that the LINX® device is a safe and effective option in patients with de novo refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease after a laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy despite appropriate weight loss.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kenneth Desart
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | | | - Michael Michel
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Tamara Lux
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Kfir Ben-David
- Mount Sinai Medical Center, Comprehensive Cancer Center, 4306 Alton Road, 2nd Floor, Miami Beach, FL, 33140, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Parekh PJ, Johnson DA. Medical treatment versus surgery for treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. TECHNIQUES IN GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY 2015. [DOI: 10.1016/j.tgie.2015.02.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|