Search

Background and Aims The objective of this study was to examine expert opinion and agreement on the treatment of distinct GERD profiles from surgical and therapeutic endoscopy perspectives. Methods We used the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method over 6 months (July 2018 to January 2019) to assess the appropriateness of antireflux interventions among foregut surgeons and therapeutic gastroenterologists. Patients with primary atypical or extraesophageal symptoms were not considered. Patient scenarios were grouped according to their symptom response to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. The primary outcome was appropriateness of an intervention. Results Antireflux surgery with laparoscopic fundoplication (LF) and magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) were ranked as appropriate for all complete and partial PPI responder scenarios. Transoral incisionless fundoplication was ranked as appropriate in complete and partial PPI responders without a hiatal hernia. Radiofrequency energy was not ranked as appropriate for complete or partial responders. There was lack of agreement between surgery and interventional gastroenterology groups on the appropriateness of LF and MSA for PPI nonresponders. Rankings for PPI nonresponders were similar when results from impedance-pH testing on PPI therapy were available, except that LF and MSA were not ranked as appropriate for PPI nonresponders if the impedance-pH study was negative. Conclusions This work highlights areas of agreement for invasive therapeutic approaches for GERD and provides impetus for further interdisciplinary collaboration and trials to compare and generate novel and effective treatment approaches and care pathways, including the role of impedance-pH testing in PPI nonresponders.

BACKGROUND Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease who have a partial response to proton-pump inhibitors often seek alternative therapy. We evaluated the safety and effectiveness of a new magnetic device to augment the lower esophageal sphincter. METHODS We prospectively assessed 100 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease before and after sphincter augmentation. The study did not include a concurrent control group. The primary outcome measure was normalization of esophageal acid exposure or a 50% or greater reduction in exposure at 1 year. Secondary outcomes were 50% or greater improvement in quality of life related to gastroesophageal reflux disease and a 50% or greater reduction in the use of proton-pump inhibitors at 1 year. For each outcome, the prespecified definition of successful treatment was achievement of the outcome in at least 60% of the patients. The 3-year results of a 5-year study are reported. RESULTS The primary outcome was achieved in 64% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 54 to 73). For the secondary outcomes, a reduction of 50% or more in the use of proton-pump inhibitors occurred in 93% of patients, and there was improvement of 50% or more in quality-of-life scores in 92%, as compared with scores for patients assessed at baseline while they were not taking proton-pump inhibitors. The most frequent adverse event was dysphagia (in 68% of patients postoperatively, in 11% at 1 year, and in 4% at 3 years). Serious adverse events occurred in six patients, and in six patients the device was removed. CONCLUSIONS In this single-group evaluation of 100 patients before and after sphincter augmentation with a magnetic device, exposure to esophageal acid decreased, reflux symptoms improved, and use of proton-pump inhibitors decreased. Follow-up studies are needed to assess long-term safety. (Funded by Torax Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00776997.)

Background The Bravo capsule allows monitoring of esophageal acid exposure over a two-day period. Experience has shown that 24–32% of patients will have abnormal esophageal acid exposure detected on only one of the 2 days monitored. This variation has been explained by the effect of endoscopy and sedation. The aim of this study was to assess the day-to-day discrepancy following transnasal placement of the Bravo capsule without endoscopy or sedation and to determine factors related to this variability. Methods Bravo pH monitoring was performed by transnasal placement of the capsule in 310 patients. Patients were divided into groups based on the composite pH score: both days normal, both days abnormal and only one of the 2 days abnormal. Lower esophageal sphincter (LES) characteristics were compared between groups. Results Of the 310 patients evaluated, 60 (19%) showed a discrepancy between the 2 days. A total of 127 patients had a normal pH score on both days and 123 had an abnormal pH score on both days. Of the 60 patients with a discrepancy, 27 were abnormal the first day and 33 (55%) were abnormal the second day. Patients with abnormal esophageal acid exposure on both days had higher degrees of esophageal acid exposure and were more likely to have a defective LES compared to those with an abnormal score on only one day (35 vs. 83%, p = 0.027). Conclusion Patients with a discrepancy between days of Bravo pH monitoring have lower esophageal acid exposure. Variability between the 2 days represents early deterioration of the gastroesophageal barrier and indicates less advanced reflux disease.

Introduction Obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are increasingly important health problems. Previous studies of the relationship between obesity and GERD focus on indirect manifestations of GERD. Little is known about the association between obesity and objectively measured esophageal acid exposure. The aim of this study is to quantify the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and 24-h esophageal pH measurements and the status of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) in patients with reflux symptoms. Methods Data of 1,659 patients (50% male, mean age 51 ± 14) referred for assessment of GERD symptoms between 1998 and 2008 were analyzed. These subjects underwent 24-h pH monitoring off medication and esophageal manometry. The relationship of BMI to 24-h esophageal pH measurements and LES status was studied using linear regression and multiple regression analysis. The difference of each acid exposure component was also assessed among four BMI subgroups (underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese) using analysis of variance and covariance. Results Increasing BMI was positively correlated with increasing esophageal acid exposure (adjusted R2 = 0.13 for the composite pH score). The prevalence of a defective LES was higher in patients with higher BMI (p

Objectives: One- and 2-year evaluation of a feasibility trial (clinicaltrials.gov registration numbers NCT01057992, NCT01058070, and 01058564) to assess the safety and efficacy of a laparoscopically implanted sphincter augmentation device for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Methods: A sphincter augmentation device (LINX Reflux Management System; Torax Medical, Shoreview, MN), designed to prevent reflux due to abnormal opening of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES), was laparoscopically implanted at the gastroesophageal junction in 44 patients. At baseline, all patients had abnormal esophageal acid exposure on 24-hour pH monitoring and improved, but persistent, typical GERD symptoms while on acid suppression therapy with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The device comprises a miniature string of interlinked titanium beads, with magnetic cores, placed around the gastroesophageal junction. The magnetic bond between adjacent beads augments sphincter competence. The beads temporarily separate to accommodate a swallowed bolus, allow belching or vomiting, and reapproximate to augment the LES in the closed position. Patients were evaluated after surgery by GERD Health-Related Quality of Life symptom score, PPI usage, endoscopy, esophageal manometry, and 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring. Results: The total mean GERD Health-Related Quality of Life symptom scores improved from a mean baseline value of 25.7 to 3.8 and 2.4 at 1- and 2-year follow-up, representing an 85% and 90% reduction, respectively (P

Objective Neoadjuvant therapy is commonly used for esophageal adenocarcinoma. We have reported reduced local recurrence rates and improved survival after an en bloc esophagectomy compared with a transhiatal resection as primary therapy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. The aim of this study was to determine whether the benefits of an en bloc resection would extend to patients after neoadjuvant therapy. Methods The charts of all patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma that had neoadjuvant therapy and en bloc or transhiatal esophagectomy from 1992–2005 were reviewed. Patients found to have systemic metastatic disease at the time of the operation or who had an incomplete resection were excluded. Results There were 58 patients: 40 had an en bloc resection and 18 had a transhiatal esophagectomy. A complete pathologic response occurred in 17 (29.3%) of 58 patients. Median follow-up was 34.1 months after en bloc resection and 18.3 months after transhiatal resection ( P = .18). Overall survival at 5 years and survival in patients with residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy was significantly better with an en bloc resection (overall survival: 51% for en bloc resection and 22% for transhiatal resection [ P = .04]; survival with residual disease: 48% for en bloc resection and 9% for transhiatal resection [ P = .02]). Survival in patients with complete pathologic response tended to be better after an en bloc resection (en bloc, 70%; transhiatal, 43%; P = .3). Conclusion An en bloc resection provides a survival advantage to patients after neoadjuvant therapy compared with a transhiatal resection, particularly for those with residual disease. Similar to patients treated with primary resection, an en bloc esophagectomy is the procedure of choice after neoadjuvant therapy.