Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 8/2017

15.12.2016 | Review

LINX® magnetic esophageal sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

verfasst von: Daniel Skubleny, Noah J. Switzer, Jerry Dang, Richdeep S. Gill, Xinzhe Shi, Christopher de Gara, Daniel W. Birch, Clarence Wong, Matthew M. Hutter, Shahzeer Karmali

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 8/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

The LINX® magnetic sphincter augmentation system (MSA) is a surgical technique with short-term evidence demonstrating efficacy in the treatment of medically refractory or chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Currently, the Nissen fundoplication is the gold-standard surgical treatment for GERD. We are the first to systematically review the literature and perform a meta-analysis comparing MSA to the Nissen fundoplication.

Methods

A comprehensive search of electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library) using search terms “Gastroesophageal reflux or heartburn” and “LINX or endoluminal or magnetic” and “fundoplication or Nissen” was completed. All randomized controlled trials, non-randomized comparison study and case series with greater than 5 patients were included. Five hundred and forty-seven titles were identified through primary search, and 197 titles or abstracts were screened after removing duplicates. Meta-analysis was performed on postoperative quality of life outcomes, procedural efficacy and patient procedural satisfaction.

Results

Three primary studies identified a total of 688 patients, of whom 273 and 415 underwent Nissen fundoplication and MSA, respectively. MSA was statistically superior to LNF in preserving patient’s ability to belch (95.2 vs 65.9%, p < 0.00001) and ability to emesis (93.5 vs 49.5%, p < 0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference between MSA and LNF in gas/bloating (26.7 vs 53.4%, p = 0.06), postoperative dysphagia (33.9 vs 47.1%, p = 0.43) and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) elimination (81.4 vs 81.5%, p = 0.68).

Conclusion

Magnetic sphincter augmentation appears to be an effective treatment for GERD with short-term outcomes comparable to the more technically challenging and time-consuming Nissen fundoplication. Long-term comparative outcome data past 1 year are needed in order to further understand the efficacy of magnetic sphincter augmentation.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat El-Serag HB, Sweet S, Winchester CC, Dent J (2014) Update on the epidemiology of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review. Gut 63:871–880CrossRefPubMed El-Serag HB, Sweet S, Winchester CC, Dent J (2014) Update on the epidemiology of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review. Gut 63:871–880CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Toghanian S, Johnson DA, Stålhammar N-O, Zerbib F (2011) Burden of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in patients with persistent and intense symptoms despite proton pump inhibitor therapy. Clin Drug Investig 31:703–715CrossRefPubMed Toghanian S, Johnson DA, Stålhammar N-O, Zerbib F (2011) Burden of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in patients with persistent and intense symptoms despite proton pump inhibitor therapy. Clin Drug Investig 31:703–715CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Castell DO, Kahrilas PJ, Richter JE, Vakil NB, Johnson DA, Zuckerman S, Skammer W, Levine JG (2002) Esomeprazole (40 mg) compared with lansoprazole (30 mg) in the treatment of erosive esophagitis. Am J Gastroenterol 97:575–583CrossRefPubMed Castell DO, Kahrilas PJ, Richter JE, Vakil NB, Johnson DA, Zuckerman S, Skammer W, Levine JG (2002) Esomeprazole (40 mg) compared with lansoprazole (30 mg) in the treatment of erosive esophagitis. Am J Gastroenterol 97:575–583CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Kinoshita Y, Ishihara S (2008) Causes of, and therapeutic approaches for, proton pump inhibitor-resistant gastroesophageal reflux disease in Asia. Ther Adv Gastroenterol 1:191–199CrossRef Kinoshita Y, Ishihara S (2008) Causes of, and therapeutic approaches for, proton pump inhibitor-resistant gastroesophageal reflux disease in Asia. Ther Adv Gastroenterol 1:191–199CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Kawamura O, Hosaka H, Shimoyama Y, Kawada A, Kuribayashi S, Kusano M, Yamada M (2015) Evaluation of proton pump inhibitor-resistant nonerosive reflux disease by esophageal manometry and 24-hour esophageal impedance and pH monitoring. Digestion 91:19–25CrossRefPubMed Kawamura O, Hosaka H, Shimoyama Y, Kawada A, Kuribayashi S, Kusano M, Yamada M (2015) Evaluation of proton pump inhibitor-resistant nonerosive reflux disease by esophageal manometry and 24-hour esophageal impedance and pH monitoring. Digestion 91:19–25CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Patti MG (2016) An evidence-based approach to the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. JAMA Surg 151:73–78CrossRefPubMed Patti MG (2016) An evidence-based approach to the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. JAMA Surg 151:73–78CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Lundell L, Miettinen P, Myrvold HE, Hatlebakk JG, Wallin L, Engstrom C, Julkunen R, Montgomery M, Malm A, Lind T, Walan A (2009) Comparison of outcomes twelve years after antireflux surgery or omeprazole maintenance therapy for reflux esophagitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Off Clin pract J Am Gastroenterol Assoc 7:1292–1298 (quiz 1260) Lundell L, Miettinen P, Myrvold HE, Hatlebakk JG, Wallin L, Engstrom C, Julkunen R, Montgomery M, Malm A, Lind T, Walan A (2009) Comparison of outcomes twelve years after antireflux surgery or omeprazole maintenance therapy for reflux esophagitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Off Clin pract J Am Gastroenterol Assoc 7:1292–1298 (quiz 1260)
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Yates RB, Oelschlager BK (2015) Surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Clin N Am 95:527–553CrossRefPubMed Yates RB, Oelschlager BK (2015) Surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Clin N Am 95:527–553CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 217:577–585CrossRefPubMed 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 217:577–585CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Ganz RA, Edmundowicz SA, Taiganides PA, Lipham JC, Smith CD, DeVault KR, Horgan S, Jacobsen G, Luketich JD, Smith CC, Schlack-Haerer SC, Kothari SN, Dunst CM, Watson TJ, Peters J, Oelschlager BK, Perry KA, Melvin S, Bemelman WA, Smout AJ, Dunn D (2016) Long-term outcomes of patients receiving a magnetic sphincter augmentation device for gastroesophageal reflux. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Off Clin Pract J Am Gastroenterol Assoc 14:671–677 Ganz RA, Edmundowicz SA, Taiganides PA, Lipham JC, Smith CD, DeVault KR, Horgan S, Jacobsen G, Luketich JD, Smith CC, Schlack-Haerer SC, Kothari SN, Dunst CM, Watson TJ, Peters J, Oelschlager BK, Perry KA, Melvin S, Bemelman WA, Smout AJ, Dunn D (2016) Long-term outcomes of patients receiving a magnetic sphincter augmentation device for gastroesophageal reflux. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Off Clin Pract J Am Gastroenterol Assoc 14:671–677
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Saino G, Bonavina L, Lipham JC, Dunn D, Ganz RA (2015) Magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux at 5 years: final results of a pilot study show long-term acid reduction and symptom improvement. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech Part A 25:787–792CrossRef Saino G, Bonavina L, Lipham JC, Dunn D, Ganz RA (2015) Magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux at 5 years: final results of a pilot study show long-term acid reduction and symptom improvement. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech Part A 25:787–792CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Lipham JC, Taiganides PA, Louie BE, Ganz RA, DeMeester TR (2015) Safety analysis of first 1000 patients treated with magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dis esophagus Off J Int Soc Dis Esophagus/ISDE 28:305–311CrossRef Lipham JC, Taiganides PA, Louie BE, Ganz RA, DeMeester TR (2015) Safety analysis of first 1000 patients treated with magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dis esophagus Off J Int Soc Dis Esophagus/ISDE 28:305–311CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Riegler M, Schoppman SF, Bonavina L, Ashton D, Horbach T, Kemen M (2015) Magnetic sphincter augmentation and fundoplication for GERD in clinical practice: one-year results of a multicenter, prospective observational study. Surg Endosc 29:1123–1129CrossRefPubMed Riegler M, Schoppman SF, Bonavina L, Ashton D, Horbach T, Kemen M (2015) Magnetic sphincter augmentation and fundoplication for GERD in clinical practice: one-year results of a multicenter, prospective observational study. Surg Endosc 29:1123–1129CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J (2003) Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg 73:712–716CrossRefPubMed Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J (2003) Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg 73:712–716CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat de Boer AG, Taskila T, Ojajarvi A, van Dijk FJ, Verbeek JH (2009) Cancer survivors and unemployment: a meta-analysis and meta-regression. JAMA 301:753–762CrossRefPubMed de Boer AG, Taskila T, Ojajarvi A, van Dijk FJ, Verbeek JH (2009) Cancer survivors and unemployment: a meta-analysis and meta-regression. JAMA 301:753–762CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Reynolds JL, Zehetner J, Wu P, Shah S, Bildzukewicz N, Lipham JC (2015) Laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation vs laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication: a matched-pair analysis of 100 patients. J Am Coll Surg 221:123–128CrossRefPubMed Reynolds JL, Zehetner J, Wu P, Shah S, Bildzukewicz N, Lipham JC (2015) Laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation vs laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication: a matched-pair analysis of 100 patients. J Am Coll Surg 221:123–128CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Louie BE, Farivar AS, Shultz D, Brennan C, Vallières E, Aye RW (2014) Short-term outcomes using magnetic sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for medically resistant gastroesophageal reflux disease. Ann Thorac Surg 98:498–505CrossRefPubMed Louie BE, Farivar AS, Shultz D, Brennan C, Vallières E, Aye RW (2014) Short-term outcomes using magnetic sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for medically resistant gastroesophageal reflux disease. Ann Thorac Surg 98:498–505CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Sheu EG, Nau P, Nath B, Kuo B, Rattner DW (2015) A comparative trial of laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation and Nissen fundoplication. Surg Endosc 29:505–509CrossRefPubMed Sheu EG, Nau P, Nath B, Kuo B, Rattner DW (2015) A comparative trial of laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation and Nissen fundoplication. Surg Endosc 29:505–509CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Warren HF, Reynolds JL, Lipham JC, Zehetner J, Bildzukewicz NA, Taiganides PA, Mickley J, Aye RW, Farivar AS and Louie BE (2016) Multi-institutional outcomes using magnetic sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Endosc 30:3289–3296CrossRefPubMed Warren HF, Reynolds JL, Lipham JC, Zehetner J, Bildzukewicz NA, Taiganides PA, Mickley J, Aye RW, Farivar AS and Louie BE (2016) Multi-institutional outcomes using magnetic sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Endosc 30:3289–3296CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Bonavina L, DeMeester TR, Ganz RA (2012) LINX™ reflux management system: magnetic sphincter augmentation in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 6:667–674CrossRefPubMed Bonavina L, DeMeester TR, Ganz RA (2012) LINX™ reflux management system: magnetic sphincter augmentation in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 6:667–674CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Bonavina L, Saino G, Lipham JC, DeMeester TR (2013) LINX(®) reflux management system in chronic gastroesophageal reflux: a novel effective technology for restoring the natural barrier to reflux. Ther Adv Gastroenterol 6:261–268CrossRef Bonavina L, Saino G, Lipham JC, DeMeester TR (2013) LINX(®) reflux management system in chronic gastroesophageal reflux: a novel effective technology for restoring the natural barrier to reflux. Ther Adv Gastroenterol 6:261–268CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
LINX® magnetic esophageal sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
verfasst von
Daniel Skubleny
Noah J. Switzer
Jerry Dang
Richdeep S. Gill
Xinzhe Shi
Christopher de Gara
Daniel W. Birch
Clarence Wong
Matthew M. Hutter
Shahzeer Karmali
Publikationsdatum
15.12.2016
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 8/2017
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5370-3

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 8/2017

Surgical Endoscopy 8/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.