Safety profile of magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease

被引:4
|
作者
Froiio, Caterina [1 ]
Aiolfi, Alberto [2 ]
Bona, Davide [2 ]
Bonavina, Luigi [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Milan, Dept Biomed Sci Hlth, Div Gen & Foregut Surg, IRCCS Policlin San Donato, Milan, Italy
[2] Univ Milan, Dept Biomed Sci Hlth, Div Gen Surg, IRCCS Galeazzi St Ambrogio, Milan, Italy
来源
FRONTIERS IN SURGERY | 2023年 / 10卷
关键词
magnetic sphincter augmentation device; LINX; erosion; dysphagia; MSA removal; gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD); LOWER ESOPHAGEAL SPHINCTER; MANAGEMENT-SYSTEM; DEVICE; EFFICACY; REMOVAL;
D O I
10.3389/fsurg.2023.1293270
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) procedure is an effective treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Adverse events requiring MSA device removal are rare, but the true prevalence and incidence may be underestimated.Methods: Retrospective study on a prospectively collected database. Patients who underwent MSA procedure between March 2007 and September 2021 in two tertiary-care referral centers for esophageal surgery were included. The trend of MSA explant, the changes in the sizing technique and crura repair over the years, the technique of explant, and the clinical outcomes of the revisional procedure were reviewed.Results: Out of 397 consecutive patients, 50 (12.4%) underwent MSA removal, with a median time to explant of 39.5 [IQR = 53.7] months. Main symptoms leading to removal were dysphagia (43.2%), heartburn (25%), and epigastric pain (13.6%). Erosion occurred in 2.5% of patients. Smaller (12- and 13-bead) devices were the ones most frequently explanted. The majority of the explants were performed laparoscopically with endoscopic assistance. There was no perioperative morbidity, and the median length of stay was 2.8 +/- 1.4 days. After 2014, changes in sizing technique and crura repair resulted in a decreased incidence of explants from 23% to 5% (p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis confirmed the protective role of added bead units [HR 0.06 (95% CI = 0.001-0.220); p < 0.000].Conclusion: Oversizing and full mediastinal dissection with posterior hiatoplasty may improve the outcomes of the MSA procedure and possibly reduce removal rates.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Efficacy of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation versus Nissen Fundoplication for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Short Term: A Meta-Analysis
    Chen, Ming-yu
    Huang, Di-yu
    Wu, Angela
    Zhu, Yi-bin
    Zhu, He-pan
    Lin, Liu-mei
    Cai, Xiu-jun
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2017, 2017
  • [32] Safety and efficacy of magnetic sphincter augmentation dilation
    Fletcher, Reid
    Dunst, Christy M.
    Abdelmoaty, Walaa F.
    Alicuben, Evan T.
    Shemmeri, Ealaf
    Parker, Brett
    Mueller, Dolores
    Sharata, Ahmed M.
    Reavis, Kevin M.
    Davila Bradley, Daniel
    Bildzukewicz, Nikolai A.
    Louie, Brian E.
    Lipham, John C.
    DeMeester, Steven R.
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2021, 35 (07): : 3861 - 3864
  • [33] One Hundred Consecutive Patients Treated with Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: 6 Years of Clinical Experience from a Single Center
    Bonavina, Luigi
    Saino, Greta
    Bona, Davide
    Sironi, Andrea
    Lazzari, Veronica
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 2013, 217 (04) : 577 - 585
  • [34] Safety and efficacy of magnetic sphincter augmentation dilation
    Reid Fletcher
    Christy M. Dunst
    Walaa F. Abdelmoaty
    Evan T. Alicuben
    Ealaf Shemmeri
    Brett Parker
    Dolores Müller
    Ahmed M. Sharata
    Kevin M. Reavis
    Daniel Davila Bradley
    Nikolai A. Bildzukewicz
    Brian E. Louie
    John C. Lipham
    Steven R. DeMeester
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2021, 35 : 3861 - 3864
  • [35] Magnetic challenge against gastroesophageal reflux
    Bortolotti, Mauro
    WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2021, 27 (48) : 8227 - 8241
  • [36] Magnetic sphincter augmentation in the management of gastro-esophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Fadel, Michael G.
    Tarazi, Munir
    Dave, Madhav
    Reddy, Marcus
    Khan, Omar
    Fakih-Gomez, Naim
    Ashrafian, Hutan
    Fehervari, Matyas
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2024, 110 (10) : 6355 - 6366
  • [37] The upper esophageal sphincter in gastroesophageal reflux disease
    Lippincott, Michelle
    Velanovich, Vic
    ANNALS OF ESOPHAGUS, 2022, 5
  • [38] Systematic review of the introduction and evaluation of magnetic augmentation of the lower oesophageal sphincter for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease
    Kirkham, E. N.
    Main, B. G.
    Jones, K. J. B.
    Blazeby, J. M.
    Blencowe, N. S.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2020, 107 (01) : 44 - 55
  • [39] LINX® magnetic esophageal sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Skubleny, Daniel
    Switzer, Noah J.
    Dang, Jerry
    Gill, Richdeep S.
    Shi, Xinzhe
    de Gara, Christopher
    Birch, Daniel W.
    Wong, Clarence
    Hutter, Matthew M.
    Karmali, Shahzeer
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2017, 31 (08): : 3078 - 3084
  • [40] A budget impact analysis of a magnetic sphincter augmentation device for the treatment of medication-refractory mechanical gastroesophageal reflux disease: a United States payer perspective
    Pandolfino, John
    Lipham, John
    Chawla, Amarpreet
    Ferko, Nicole
    Hogan, Andrew
    Qadeer, Rana A.
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2020, 34 (04): : 1561 - 1572