Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 4/2013

Open Access 01-04-2013

Electrical stimulation therapy of the lower esophageal sphincter is successful in treating GERD: final results of open-label prospective trial

Authors: Leonardo Rodríguez, Patricia Rodriguez, Beatriz Gómez, Juan C. Ayala, Jorge Saba, Alberto Perez-Castilla, Manoel Galvao Neto, Michael D. Crowell

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 4/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) improves LES pressure without interfering with LES relaxation. The aim of this open-label pilot trial was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of long-term LES stimulation using a permanently implanted LES stimulator in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

Methods

GERD patients who were at least partially responsive to proton pump inhibitors (PPI) with abnormal esophageal pH, hiatal hernia ≤3 cm, and esophagitis ≤LA grade C were included. Bipolar stitch electrodes were placed in the LES and an IPG was placed in a subcutaneous pocket. Electrical stimulation was delivered at 20 Hz, 215 μs, 3–8 mA in 30 min sessions. The number and timing of sessions was tailored to each patient’s GERD profile. Patients were evaluated using GERD-HRQL, daily symptom and medication diaries, SF-12, esophageal pH, and high-resolution manometry.

Results

24 patients (mean age = 53 years, SD = 12 years; 14 men) were implanted; 23 completed their 6-month evaluation. Median GERD-HRQL scores at 6 months was 2.0 (IQR = 0–5.5) and was significantly better than both baseline on-PPI [9.0 (range = 6.0–10.0); p < 0.001] and off-PPI [23 (21–25); p < 0.001] GERD-HRQL. Median%  24-h esophageal pH < 4.0 at baseline was 10.1 and improved to 5.1 at 6 months (p < 0.001). At their 6-month follow-up, 91 % (21/23) of the patients were off PPI and had significantly better median GERD-HRQL on LES stimulation compared to their on-PPI GERD-HRQL at baseline (9.0 vs. 2.0; p < 0.001). There were no unanticipated implantation- or stimulation-related adverse events or untoward sensation due to stimulation. There were no reports of treatment-related dysphagia, and manometric swallow was also unaffected.

Conclusions

Electrical stimulation of the LES is safe and effective for treating GERD. There is a significant and sustained improvement in GERD symptoms, esophageal pH, and reduction in PPI usage without any side effects with the therapy. Furthermore, the therapy can be optimized to address an individual patient’s disease.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Sandler RS, Everhart JE, Donowitz M et al (2002) The burden of selected digestive diseases in the United States. Gastroenterology 122:1500–1511PubMedCrossRef Sandler RS, Everhart JE, Donowitz M et al (2002) The burden of selected digestive diseases in the United States. Gastroenterology 122:1500–1511PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Everhart JE (ed) (1994) Digestive diseases in the United States: epidemiology and impact. US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, NIH publication No. 94–1447 Everhart JE (ed) (1994) Digestive diseases in the United States: epidemiology and impact. US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, NIH publication No. 94–1447
3.
go back to reference Stefanidis D, Hope WW, Kohn GP et al (2010) Guidelines for surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Endosc 24:2647–2669PubMedCrossRef Stefanidis D, Hope WW, Kohn GP et al (2010) Guidelines for surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Endosc 24:2647–2669PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference American Gastroenterological Association (2008) GERD patient study: patients and their medications. Harris Interactive Inc., New York American Gastroenterological Association (2008) GERD patient study: patients and their medications. Harris Interactive Inc., New York
5.
go back to reference Ellis F, Berne TV, Settevig K (1968) The prevention of experimentally induced reflux by electrical stimulation of the distal esophagus. Am J Surg 115:482–487PubMedCrossRef Ellis F, Berne TV, Settevig K (1968) The prevention of experimentally induced reflux by electrical stimulation of the distal esophagus. Am J Surg 115:482–487PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Clarke JO, Jagannath SB, Kalloo AN et al (2007) An endoscopically implantable device stimulates the lower esophageal sphincter on demand by remote control: a study using a canine model. Endoscopy 39:72–76PubMedCrossRef Clarke JO, Jagannath SB, Kalloo AN et al (2007) An endoscopically implantable device stimulates the lower esophageal sphincter on demand by remote control: a study using a canine model. Endoscopy 39:72–76PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Sanmiguel CP, Hagiike M, Mintchev MP et al (2008) Effect of electrical stimulation of the LES on LES pressure in a canine model. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 295:389–394CrossRef Sanmiguel CP, Hagiike M, Mintchev MP et al (2008) Effect of electrical stimulation of the LES on LES pressure in a canine model. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 295:389–394CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Rodríguez L, Rodríguez P, Neto MG et al (2012) Short-term electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter increases sphincter pressure in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Neurogastroenterol Motil 24:446–450PubMedCrossRef Rodríguez L, Rodríguez P, Neto MG et al (2012) Short-term electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter increases sphincter pressure in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Neurogastroenterol Motil 24:446–450PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P et al (2006) The montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol 101:1900–1920PubMedCrossRef Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P et al (2006) The montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol 101:1900–1920PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Kahrilas PJ, Shaheen NJ, Vaezi MF et al. (2008) American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement on the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterology 135:1383–1391, 1391.e1-5 Kahrilas PJ, Shaheen NJ, Vaezi MF et al. (2008) American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement on the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterology 135:1383–1391, 1391.e1-5
11.
go back to reference Lodato F, Azzaroli F, Turco L et al (2010) Adverse effects of proton pump inhibitors. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 24(2):193–201PubMedCrossRef Lodato F, Azzaroli F, Turco L et al (2010) Adverse effects of proton pump inhibitors. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 24(2):193–201PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Spechler SJ, Lee E, Ahnen D et al (2001) Long-term outcome of medical and surgical therapies for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 285:2331–2338PubMedCrossRef Spechler SJ, Lee E, Ahnen D et al (2001) Long-term outcome of medical and surgical therapies for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 285:2331–2338PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Vakil N, Shaw M, Kirby R (2003) Clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic fundoplication in a US community. Am J Med 114:1–5PubMedCrossRef Vakil N, Shaw M, Kirby R (2003) Clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic fundoplication in a US community. Am J Med 114:1–5PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Rothstein RI (2008) Endoscopic therapy of gastroesophageal reflux disease: outcomes of the randomized-controlled trials done to date. J Clin Gastroenterol 42:594–602PubMedCrossRef Rothstein RI (2008) Endoscopic therapy of gastroesophageal reflux disease: outcomes of the randomized-controlled trials done to date. J Clin Gastroenterol 42:594–602PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Cadière GB, Van Sante N, Graves JE et al (2009) Two-year results of a feasibility study on antireflux transoral incisionless fundoplication using EsophyX. Surg Endosc 23:957–964PubMedCrossRef Cadière GB, Van Sante N, Graves JE et al (2009) Two-year results of a feasibility study on antireflux transoral incisionless fundoplication using EsophyX. Surg Endosc 23:957–964PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Bonavina L, DeMeester T, Fockens P et al (2010) Laparoscopic sphincter augmentation device eliminates reflux symptoms and normalizes esophageal acid exposure: one- and 2-year results of a feasibility trial. Ann Surg 252:857–862PubMedCrossRef Bonavina L, DeMeester T, Fockens P et al (2010) Laparoscopic sphincter augmentation device eliminates reflux symptoms and normalizes esophageal acid exposure: one- and 2-year results of a feasibility trial. Ann Surg 252:857–862PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Banerjee R, Pratap N, Kalapala R, Reddy DN (2010) In patients with GERD, electrical stimulation therapy (EST) significantly and consistently increases lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 25:A16CrossRef Banerjee R, Pratap N, Kalapala R, Reddy DN (2010) In patients with GERD, electrical stimulation therapy (EST) significantly and consistently increases lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 25:A16CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Galmiche JP, Hatlebakk J, Attwood S et al (2011) laparoscopic antireflux surgery versus esomeprazole treatment for chronic GERD. the LOTUS randomized clinical trial. JAMA 305:1969–1977PubMedCrossRef Galmiche JP, Hatlebakk J, Attwood S et al (2011) laparoscopic antireflux surgery versus esomeprazole treatment for chronic GERD. the LOTUS randomized clinical trial. JAMA 305:1969–1977PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference McCallum RW, Zhiyue L, Forester J et al (2011) Gastric electrical stimulation improves outcomes of patients with gastroparesis for up to 10 years. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 9:314–319PubMedCrossRef McCallum RW, Zhiyue L, Forester J et al (2011) Gastric electrical stimulation improves outcomes of patients with gastroparesis for up to 10 years. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 9:314–319PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Watson DI, Baigrie RJ, Jamieson GG (1996) A learning curve for laparoscopic fundoplication. Definable, avoidable, or a waste of time? Ann Surg 224:198–203PubMedCrossRef Watson DI, Baigrie RJ, Jamieson GG (1996) A learning curve for laparoscopic fundoplication. Definable, avoidable, or a waste of time? Ann Surg 224:198–203PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Deschamps C, Allen MS, Trastek VF, Johnson JO, Pairolero PC (1998) Early experience and learning curve associated with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 115:281–284 discussion 284–285PubMedCrossRef Deschamps C, Allen MS, Trastek VF, Johnson JO, Pairolero PC (1998) Early experience and learning curve associated with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 115:281–284 discussion 284–285PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Electrical stimulation therapy of the lower esophageal sphincter is successful in treating GERD: final results of open-label prospective trial
Authors
Leonardo Rodríguez
Patricia Rodriguez
Beatriz Gómez
Juan C. Ayala
Jorge Saba
Alberto Perez-Castilla
Manoel Galvao Neto
Michael D. Crowell
Publication date
01-04-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 4/2013
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2561-4

Other articles of this Issue 4/2013

Surgical Endoscopy 4/2013 Go to the issue