Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Charges, outcomes, and complications: a comparison of magnetic sphincter augmentation versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for the treatment of GERD

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bonavina L, DeMeester T, Fockens P, Dunn D, Saino G, Bona D, Lipham J, Bemelman W, Ganz RA (2010) Laparoscopic sphincter augmentation device eliminates reflux symptoms and normalizes esophageal acid exposure: one- and 2-year results of a feasibility trial. Ann Surg 252:857–862

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bonavina L, Saino G, Bona D, Sironi A, Lazzari V (2013) One hundred consecutive patients treated with magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease: 6 years of clinical experience from a single center. J Am Coll Surg 217:577–585

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ganz RA, Peters JH, Horgan S, Bemelman WA, Dunst CM, Edmundowicz SA, Lipham JC, Luketich JD, Melvin WS, Oelschlager BK, Schlack-Haerer SC, Smith CD, Smith CC, Dunn D, Taiganides PA (2013) Esophageal sphincter device for gastroesophageal reflux disease. N Engl J Med 368:719–727

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lipham JC, Taiganides PA, Louie BE, Ganz RA, Demeester TR (2014) Safety analysis of first 1000 patients treated with magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dis Esophagus 28(4):305–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Louie BE, Farivar AS, Shultz D, Brennan C, Vallieres E, Aye RW (2014) Short-term outcomes using magnetic sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for medically resistant gastroesophageal reflux disease. Ann Thorac Surg 98:498–504 (discussion 504–495)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Riegler M, Schoppman S, Bonavina L, Ashton D, Horbach T, Kemen M (2014) Magnetic sphincter augmentation and fundoplication for GERD in clinical practice: one-year results of a multicenter, prospective observational study. Surg Endosc 29(5):1123–1129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sheu EG, Nau P, Nath B, Kuo B, Rattner DW (2014) A comparative trial of laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation and Nissen fundoplication. Surg Endosc 29(3):505–509

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Reynolds JL, Zehetner J, Bildzukewicz N, Katkhouda N, Dandekar G, Lipham JC (2014) Magnetic sphincter augmentation with the LINX device for gastroesophageal reflux disease after U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval. Am Surg 80:1034–1038

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Velanovich V (2007) The development of the GERD-HRQL symptom severity instrument. Dis Esophagus 20:130–134

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Goeree R, Hopkins R, Marshall JK, Armstrong D, Ungar WJ, Goldsmith C, Allen C, Anvari M (2011) Cost-utility of laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication versus proton pump inhibitors for chronic and controlled gastroesophageal reflux disease: a 3-year prospective randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation. Value Health 14:263–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Grant AM, Boachie C, Cotton SC, Faria R, Bojke L, Epstein DM, Ramsay CR, Corbacho B, Sculpher M, Krukowski ZH, Heading RC, Campbell MK (2013) Clinical and economic evaluation of laparoscopic surgery compared with medical management for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: 5-year follow-up of multicentre randomised trial (the REFLUX trial). Health Technol Assess 17:1–167

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Reynolds JL, Zehetner J, Wu P, Shah S, Bildzukewicz N, Lipham JC (2015) Laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication: a matched-pair analysis of 100 patients. J Am Coll Surg 221(1):123–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Keck Medical Center, University of Southern California, 1510 San Pablo Street, Suite 514, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA

    Jessica L. Reynolds, Joerg Zehetner, Angela Nieh, Nikolai Bildzukewicz, Kulmeet Sandhu, Namir Katkhouda & John C. Lipham

Authors
  1. Jessica L. Reynolds
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joerg Zehetner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Angela Nieh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nikolai Bildzukewicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kulmeet Sandhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Namir Katkhouda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. John C. Lipham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John C. Lipham.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Dr. John Lipham is a consultant for Torax Medical. Drs. Zehetner, Bildzukewicz, Crookes, Sandhu, and Katkhouda have nothing to disclose. Angela Nieh has nothing to disclose.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Reynolds, J.L., Zehetner, J., Nieh, A. et al. Charges, outcomes, and complications: a comparison of magnetic sphincter augmentation versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for the treatment of GERD. Surg Endosc 30, 3225–3230 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4635-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4635-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation