Antireflux mucosal intervention (ARMI) procedures for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Effect of Anti-reflux Mucosal Ablation on Esophageal Motility in Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Study Based on High-resolution Impedance Manometry

Background/Aims

Anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) is a promising endoscopic intervention for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the effect of ARMA on esophageal motility remains unclear.

Methods

Twenty patients with PPI-dependent GERD receiving ARMA were prospectively enrolled. Comprehensive self-report symptom questionnaires, endoscopy, 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring, and high-resolution impedance manometry were performed and analyzed before and 3 months after ARMA.

Results

All ARMA procedures were performed successfully. Symptom scores, including GerdQ (11.16 ± 2.67 to 9.11 ± 2.64, P = 0.026) and reflux symptom index (11.63 ± 5.62 to 6.11 ± 3.86, P = 0.001), improved significantly, while 13 patients (65%) reported discontinuation of PPI. Total acid exposure time (5.84 ± 4.63% to 2.83 ± 3.41%, P = 0.024) and number of reflux episodes (73.05 ± 19.34 to 37.55 ± 22.71, P < 0.001) decreased significantly after ARMA. Improved esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier function, including increased lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure (13.89 ± 10.78 mmHg to 21.68 ± 11.5 mmHg, P = 0.034), 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (5.75 ± 6.42 mmHg to 9.99 ± 5.89 mmHg, P = 0.020), and EGJ-contractile integral (16.42 ± 16.93 mmHg·cm to 31.95 ± 21.25 mmHg·cm, P = 0.016), were observed. Esophageal body contractility also increased significantly (distal contractile integral, 966.85 ± 845.84 mmHg·s·cm to 1198.8 ± 811.74 mmHg·s·cm, P = 0.023). Patients with symptom improvement had better pre-AMRA esophageal body contractility.

Conclusions

ARMA effectively improves symptoms and reflux burden, EGJ barrier function, and esophageal body contractility in patients with PPIdependent GERD during short-term evaluation. Longer follow-up to clarify the sustainability of ARMA is needed.

Utility of endoscopic pressure study integrated system for gastroesophageal reflux disease after endoscopic antireflux therapy

OBJECTIVES

The endoscopic pressure study integrated system (EPSIS) measures intragastric pressure (IGP) during esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Previous research demonstrated that EPSIS correlates with the 24-h impedance-pH (MII-pH) test and shows lower maximum IGP (IGP-Max) and a flatter waveform gradient in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients, attributed to lower esophageal sphincter dysfunction. Although endoscopic antireflux therapy (EARTh) is effective for GERD, the MII-pH monitoring, the gold standard for assessing treatment outcomes, requires hospitalization and can be a burden. EPSIS offers a noninvasive alternative for evaluating post-EARTh outcomes. This study aimed to assess EPSIS as an additional diagnostic tool in this context.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of GERD patients who underwent EARTh and were subsequently assessed using EPSIS within 6 months, from May 2018 to April 2024. Changes in IGP parameters, including IGP-Max and waveform gradient, were analyzed pre- and post-EARTh. Additionally, the study examined Hill's Classification following EARTh.

RESULTS

Out of 39 patients assessed with EPSIS before and after EARTh, the average age was 55 years (standard deviation [SD] 16.7), with 64.1% male. Postoperative IGP-Max increased from 15.2 mmHg to 18.0 mmHg (P = 0.004), and the pressure gradient improved from 0.16 mmHg/s to 0.28 mmHg/s (P < 0.001). Hill's Classification improved significantly from a mean of 2.2 (SD 0.7) to 1.1 (SD 0.3) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that EPSIS is a reliable diagnostic tool for evaluating the effects of EARTh and holds potential as a supplementary tool for assessing GERD treatment outcomes.

Network meta-analysis of the efficacy of endoscopic cardia peripheral tissue scar formation (ECSF) in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Endoscopic antireflux therapy is widely used in clinical practice. Peroral endoscopic cardial constriction (PECC), antireflux mucosal intervention (ARMI), and radiofrequency ablation (RF) possess analogous antireflux mechanisms. This comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate and compare the safety and effectiveness of antireflux therapy during endoscopic cardia peripheral tissue scar formation (ECSF) procedures. We comprehensively searched the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wan-Fang databases for articles published from January 1990 to January 2024. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to assess the outcomes, with outcome metrics including the Gastroesophageal Reflux Questionnaire (GERD-Q) score, proton pump inhibitor discontinuation rate, pH <4.2 percent acid reflux time (AET), lower esophageal pressure (LES pressure), DeMeester score, adverse events, and patient satisfaction. Twenty studies involving 1219 patients were included. PECC was significantly superior to RF in lowering the patients' postoperative GERD-Q scores(MD = -2.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): [-3.02, -1.66]), augmentation of LES pressures(MD = 3.22, 95% CI: [1.21, 5.23]), and having a lower incidence of serious adverse events. ARMI was preferable to PECC (MD = -2.87, 95% CI [-4.23, -1.51])and RF (MD = -1.12, 95% CI [-1.79, -0.54]) in reducing the AET percentage, but was not as effective as PECC in lowering GERD-Q scores(MD = -1.50, 95% CI [-2.47, -0.53]). The incidence of adverse effects was less than 10% for all interventions, with most of them mildly self-resolving. Each ECSF procedure resulted in a favorable outcome in patients with GERD. Considering the safety and efficacy of treatment, PECC was the most favorable choice among ECSF procedures.

Antireflux mucosectomy for gastroesophageal reflux disease: efficacy and the mechanism of action

BACKGROUND

Previous studies suggested that antireflux mucosectomy (ARMS) is effective in reducing reflux symptoms and total acid exposure, although the mechanism is unknown. Our objective was to investigate the effect of ARMS on reflux parameters and its mechanism of action.

METHODS

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients with insufficient symptom control despite a twice-daily proton pump inhibitor (PPI) underwent a piecemeal multiband mucosectomy of 50% of the circumference of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ), extending 2 cm into the cardia. The primary end point was the total number of reflux episodes during 24-hour pH-impedance studies.

RESULTS

11 patients (8 men; median age 37 [interquartile range (IQR) 32-57] years) were treated, with one patient subsequently lost to follow-up. ARMS reduced the median (IQR) number of total reflux episodes (74 [60-82] vs. 37 [28-66]; P = 0.008) and total acid exposure time (8.7% [6.4%-12.7%] vs. 5.3% [3.5%-6.7%]; P = 0.03). Treatment reduced the median (IQR) number of transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations (TLESRs) during a 90-minute postprandial period (4 [1-8] vs. 2 [1-4]; P = 0.03) and reflux symptom scores (3.6 [3.6-3.9] vs. 1.6 [0.7-2.7]; P = 0.005). Treatment did not increase the mean (SD) dysphagia scores (8.2 [7.3] vs. 8.5 [6.5]) or change the EGJ distensibility on impedance planimetry (4.4 [2.1] vs. 4.3 [2.2] mm2/mmHg). One delayed post-procedural bleed requiring repeat endoscopy occurred (10%); no strictures developed.

CONCLUSION

ARMS is an effective treatment option in PPI-refractory GERD, reducing acid exposure, reflux episodes, and symptoms. While its working mechanism could not be explained by a difference in distensibility, a reduction in TLESRs might play a role.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease: indications for antireflux surgery, outcomes, and side effects

INTRODUCTION

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a frequent digestive disorder that presents with a broad spectrum of symptoms. Global consensus on which patients should be selected for anti-reflux surgery is lacking.

AREAS COVERED

This evidence-based review will analyze current indications for anti-reflux surgery, outcomes of the operation, and potential side effects.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Treatment of GERD has three main purposes: control symptoms, improve quality of life, and prevent potential serious complications such as bleeding, esophageal stenosis, Barrett's esophagus, and esophageal adenocarcinoma. Although medical therapy is effective in the majority of patients, some might require anti-reflux surgery in order to achieve these goals. Adequate patient selection for anti-reflux surgery is critical to obtain optimal outcomes. Most patients undergoing a fundoplication have adequate long-term symptomatic relief. However, potential side effects of anti-reflux surgery should also be discussed with patients to help manage expectations from the operation.

Outcomes of Endoscopic Antireflux Mucosectomy for the Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common gastrointestinal disorders in western countries. Endoscopic procedures have recently emerged as an alternative therapy to surgery for patients with GERD. The aim of this study was to determine outcomes after endoscopic antireflux mucosectomy (ARMS).

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to analyze outcomes after ARMS. The main outcomes included patients' satisfaction, GERD health-related quality of life, use of proton pump inhibitors, and DeMeester score. The secondary endpoint was postprocedural adverse events. A meta-analysis of proportions was used to assess the effect of each approach on different outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies comprising 654 patients were included for analysis. The mean age of patients was 51.83 (36 to 59.39) years, and the mean body mass index was 25.06 (23.5 to 27) kg/m 2 . The weighted pooled proportion of patient satisfaction after ARMS was 65% (95% CI: 52%-76%). The pooled proportion of patients taking proton pump inhibitors decreases from 100% to 40.84% ( P < 0.001). The mean GERD health-related quality of life scores (pre 19.48 vs post 7.90, P < 0.001) and DeMeester score (pre 44.99 vs post 15.02 P = 0.005) significantly improved after ARMS. Overall morbidity rate was 27% (95% CI: 13%-47%), with a weighted pooled proportion of perforation, stricture, and bleeding of 3% (95% CI: 2%-6%), 12% (95% CI: 9%-16%), and 6% (95% CI: 2%-17%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ARMS for GERD is associated with symptomatic improvement, reduction of medical therapy, and enhanced quality of life. Refinements of the technique, however, are needed to decrease morbidity.

Closure in antireflux mucoplasty using anchor prong clips: dead space-eliminating technique

Video 1Introducing the dead space eliminating technique (DET), a closure method using anchor pronged clips for antireflux mucoplasty in treating proton pump inhibitor refractory-dependent GERD. DET ensures comprehensive dead space elimination during closure.

Enhancing closure efficacy in antireflux mucoplasty through endoscopic hand-suturing technique

Video 1XXX.

Pilot study on anti-reflux mucoplasty: Advancing endoscopic anti-reflux therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease

OBJECTIVES

Anti-reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) and anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) were developed as interventions for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-refractory/-dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Although ARMS and ARMA are established treatments for PPI-refractory GERD, reliance on natural healing for ulcer scar formation introduces uncertainty and bleeding risk. To address these issues, we introduced a novel approach called anti-reflux mucoplasty (ARM-P), which involves immediate closure of mucosal defects following mucosectomy. This pilot study aims to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of ARM-P.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center study was conducted using prospectively collected data from October 2022 to July 2023. Patients with PPI-refractory/-dependent GERD who underwent ARM-P were included. The study evaluated technical success of ARM-P, before and after ARM-P GERD-Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, GerdQ, and Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of GERD scores, along with PPI discontinuation and endoscopic esophagogastric junction morphology.

RESULTS

A total of 20 patients with a median age of 61.5 years underwent the ARM-P procedure. The procedure achieved 100% technical success without adverse events. After ARM-P, 55.0% discontinued PPI usage and 15.0% reduced PPI dose by half. Median GERD-Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire score improved from 21 to 6 (P = 0.0026), median GerdQ score improved from 9 to 7 (P = 0.0022), and median Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of GERD score decreased from 16 to 7 (P = 0.0003). Median Hill's Classification significantly improved from grade III to grade I (P = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents the first pilot report of ARM-P, demonstrating its procedural safety, technical feasibility, and short-term efficacy.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic cardia peripheral tissue scar formation (ECSF) for the treatment of refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease: A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatment is increasingly used for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (rGERD). Unlike the mechanism of conventional surgical fundoplication, gastroesophageal junction ligation, anti-reflux mucosal intervention, and radiofrequency ablation have extremely similar anti-reflux mechanisms; hence, we collectively refer to them as endoscopic cardia peripheral tissue scar formation (ECSF). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of ECSF in treating rGERD.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of several databases, including PubMed, Embase, Medline, China Knowledge Network, and Wanfang, to ensure a systematic approach for data collection between January 2011 and July 2023. Forest plots were used to summarize and combine the GERD-health-related quality of life (HRQL), gastroesophageal reflux questionnaire score, and DeMeester scores, acid exposure time, lower esophageal sphincter pressure, esophagitis, proton pump inhibitors use, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

This study comprised 37 studies, including 1732 patients. After ECSF, significant improvement in gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life score (mean difference [MD] = 18.27 95% CI: 14.81-21.74), gastroesophageal reflux questionnaire score (MD = 4.85 95% CI: 3.96-5.75), DeMeester score (MD = 42.34, 95% CI: 31.37-53.30), acid exposure time (MD = 7.98, 95% CI: 6.03-9.92), and lower esophageal sphincter pressure was observed (MD = -5.01, 95% CI: -8.39 to 1.62). The incidence of serious adverse effects after ECSF was 1.1% (95% CI: 0.9%-1.2%), and postoperatively, 67.4% (95% CI: 66.4%-68.2%) of patients could discontinue proton pump inhibitor-like drugs, and the treatment outcome was observed to be satisfactory in over 80% of the patients. Subgroup analyses of the various procedures showed that all 3 types improved several objective or subjective patient indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current meta-analysis, we conclude that rGERD can be safely and effectively treated with ECSF as an endoscopic procedure.

Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Diagnosis and Management

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is common, with increasing worldwide disease prevalence and high economic burden. A significant number of patients will remain symptomatic following an empiric proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trial. Persistent symptoms despite PPI therapy are often mislabeled as refractory GERD. For patients with no prior GERD evidence (unproven GERD), testing is performed off antisecretory therapy to identify objective evidence of pathologic reflux using criteria outlined by the Lyon consensus. In proven GERD, differentiation between refractory symptoms (persisting symptoms despite optimized antisecretory therapy) and refractory GERD (abnormal reflux metrics on ambulatory pH impedance monitoring and/or persistent erosive esophagitis on endoscopy while on optimized PPI therapy) can direct subsequent management. While refractory symptoms may arise from esophageal hypersensitivity or functional heartburn, proven refractory GERD requires personalization of the management approach, tapping from an array of non-pharmacologic, pharmacologic, endoscopic, and surgical interventions. Proper diagnosis and management of refractory GERD is critical to mitigate undesirable long-term complications such as strictures, Barrett's esophagus, and esophageal adenocarcinoma. This review outlines the diagnostic workup of patients presenting with refractory GERD symptoms, describes the distinction between unproven and proven GERD, and provides a comprehensive review of the current treatment strategies available for the management of refractory GERD.

New Perspectives in Endoscopic Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease has a high incidence and prevalence in the general population. Clinical manifestations are heterogenous, and so is the response to medical treatment. Proton pump inhibitors are still the most common agents used to control reflux symptoms and for healing esophagitis, but they are not a one-size-fits-all solution for the disease. Patients with persistent troublesome symptoms despite medical therapy, those experiencing some adverse drug reaction, or those unwilling to take lifelong medications deserve valid alternatives. Anti-reflux Nissen fundoplication is an effective option, but the risk of adverse events has limited its spread. In recent years, advancements in therapeutic endoscopy have been made, and three major endoluminal alternatives are now available, including (1) the delivery of radiofrequency energy to the esophago-gastric junction, (2) transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF), and (3) anti-reflux mucosal interventions (ARMI) based on mucosal resection (ARMS) and mucosal ablation (ARMA) techniques to remodel the cardia. Endoscopic techniques have shown interesting results, but their diffusion is still limited to expert endoscopists in tertiary centers. This review discusses the state of the art in the endoscopic approach to gastroesophageal reflux disease.