Evolution of a novel technology for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a safety perspective of magnetic sphincter augmentation

被引:15
|
作者
DeMarchi, Janet [1 ]
Schwiers, Michael [2 ]
Soberman, Mark [3 ]
Tokarski, Allison [4 ]
机构
[1] Ethicon Inc, Med Affairs, Cincinnati, OH 45242 USA
[2] Ethicon Inc, Biostat, Cincinnati, OH USA
[3] Ethicon Inc, Med Safety, Cincinnati, OH USA
[4] Ethicon Inc, Clin Affairs, Cincinnati, OH USA
关键词
gastroesophageal reflux disease; GERD; LINX; magnetic sphincter augmentation; MSA; MANAGEMENT-SYSTEM; LINX(R) REFLUX; ESOPHAGEAL; EFFICACY;
D O I
10.1093/dote/doab036
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Magnetic sphincter augmentation using the LINX (R) device is a minimally invasive surgical option for patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. An estimated 30,000 devices have been implanted worldwide. Device removals and erosion are identified risks. The objective of this analysis is to explore the procedure evolution with an emphasis on the removals and associated characteristics that may guide future clinical practice. TheManufacturer and User FacilityDevice Experience and Ethicon's complaint databases were queried for all surgical device explants since January 2013. Device unit sales were used to determine the rates. The endpoint was based upon the time from implant to explant. Explant and erosion rates were calculated at yearly intervals and the Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to measure the time to explant. Chi-square analyses were used to investigate the risk of explant associated with the size, geography and implant year. Overall, 7-year cumulative risk of removal was 4.81% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) CI: 4.31-5.36%). The likelihood of removal was significantly related to the device size (P < 0.0001), with smaller sizes being more likely to be explanted. The primary reasons for device removal and relative percentages were dysphagia/odynophagia (47.9%), persistent gastroesophageal reflux disease (20.5%) and unknown/other (11.2%). Overall, the 7-year cumulative risk of erosion was 0.28% (95% CI: 0.17-0.46%). The average device size increased from 14.2 beads +/- 1.0 in 2013 to 15.3 beads +/- 1.2 in 2019 (P < 0.001). Surgical technique and perioperative management play an important role in the outcomes. Clinical practice changes since magnetic sphincter augmentation has been incorporated into clinical use are associated with improved outcomes and should be further characterized. Smaller device size is associated with increased removal and erosion rates.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation Algorithm for Post-bariatric Surgery Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Patients
    Reddy, Nikhil C.
    Sujka, Joseph
    DuCoin, Christopher
    OBESITY SURGERY, 2022, 32 (09) : 3185 - 3187
  • [42] Adverse Events After Implantation of a Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation Device for Gastroesophageal Reflux
    Bielefeldt, Klaus
    CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2016, 14 (10) : 1507 - 1508
  • [43] Laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation versus fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease: systematic review and pooled analysis
    Guidozzi, Nadia
    Wiggins, Tom
    Ahmed, Ahmed R.
    Hanna, George B.
    Markar, Sheraz R.
    DISEASES OF THE ESOPHAGUS, 2019, 32 (09)
  • [44] GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE AFTER BARIATRIC SURGERY: MAGNETIC SPHINCTER AUGMENTATION IN PATIENTS WITH NORMAL ESOPHAGEAL MOTILITY
    Tsai, C.
    Kessler, U.
    Steffen, R.
    Zehetner, J.
    OBESITY SURGERY, 2018, 28 : 359 - 359
  • [45] Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation for Gastroesophageal Reflux After Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review
    Cammarata, Francesco
    Novia, Martina
    Aiolfi, Alberto
    Damiani, Riccardo
    Manara, Michele
    Giovanelli, Alessandro
    Berta, Rossana Daniela
    Anselmino, Marco
    Ogliari, Cristina
    Bona, Davide
    Bonavina, Luigi
    OBESITY SURGERY, 2024, 34 (11) : 4232 - 4243
  • [46] "The missing LINX" for gastroesophageal reflux disease: Operative techniques video for the Linx magnetic sphincter augmentation procedure
    Kuckelman, John P.
    Barron, Morgan R.
    Martin, Matthew J.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2017, 213 (05): : 984 - 987
  • [47] Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation Is Safe and Effective for the Long-Term Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)
    Ganz, Robert A.
    Bonavina, Luigi
    DeMeester, Tom R.
    Dunn, Daniel H.
    Lipham, John C.
    Saino, Greta
    Bona, Davide
    Fockens, Paul
    Bemelman, Willem
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2009, 136 (05) : A739 - A739
  • [48] Magnetic sphincter augmentation in treating refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zhuang, Qian Jun
    Tan, Nian Di
    Chen, Song Feng
    Zhang, Meng Yu
    Xiao, Ying Lian
    JOURNAL OF DIGESTIVE DISEASES, 2021, 22 (12) : 695 - 705
  • [49] Feasibility and Efficacy of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation for the Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Post-Sleeve Gastrectomy for Obesity
    Leena Khaitan
    Michael Hill
    Michael Michel
    Patrick Chiasson
    Philip Woodworth
    Reginald Bell
    Ragui Sadek
    Aaron Hoffman
    Kari Loing
    Paula Veldhuis
    William Petraiuolo
    Carlos Anciano
    Obesity Surgery, 2023, 33 : 387 - 396
  • [50] Feasibility and Efficacy of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation for the Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Post-Sleeve Gastrectomy for Obesity
    Khaitan, Leena
    Hill, Michael
    Michel, Michael
    Chiasson, Patrick
    Woodworth, Philip
    Bell, Reginald
    Sadek, Ragui
    Hoffman, Aaron
    Loing, Kari
    Veldhuis, Paula
    Petraiuolo, William
    Anciano, Carlos
    OBESITY SURGERY, 2023, 33 (01) : 387 - 396