Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 2/2019

01-02-2019 | 2018 SAGES Oral

Regression of intestinal metaplasia following magnetic sphincter augmentation device placement

Authors: Evan T. Alicuben, James M. Tatum, Nikolai Bildzukewicz, Kamran Samakar, Jamil S. Samaan, Einav N. Silverstein, Kulmeet Sandhu, Caitlin C. Houghton, John C. Lipham

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 2/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Intestinal metaplasia represents an esophageal mucosal transformation due to uncontrolled gastroesophageal reflux disease. Fundoplication has been shown to lead to regression of disease. Magnetic sphincter augmentation is an alternative to fundoplication that effectively treats reflux disease. Initially, patients with intestinal metaplasia were not considered candidates for device placement, so outcomes in these patients are unknown.

Methods

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent magnetic sphincter augmentation device placement between 2007 and 2017 was performed. All patients underwent pre-operative endoscopic evaluation and were categorized as having ultra-short segment (less than 1 cm), short-segment (1–3 cm), or long-segment (greater than or equal to 3 cm) disease. To be included in the study, pathologic examination demonstrating columnar mucosa with goblet cells was required.

Results

There were 86 patients with biopsy-proven non-dysplastic intestinal metaplasia. 35 patients had ultra-short segment, 37 patients had short-segment, and 14 patients had long-segment disease. At a median follow-up of 1.2 years, 67/86 (78%) patients completed endoscopic follow-up. 48/67 (71.6%) patients had regression of intestinal metaplasia. There was no progression to dysplasia or carcinoma. Patients with abnormal post-operative DeMeester scores were less likely to have regression of disease. Regression was more likely in the ultra-short segment (82.8%) and short-segment (73.3%) groups compared to the long-segment group (25.0%).

Conclusions

Magnetic sphincter augmentation is effective in achieving regression of intestinal metaplasia. Longer-term follow-up is needed to assess durability of effect and make meaningful comparisons to fundoplication.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Zehetner J, DeMeester SR, Ayazi S, Costales JL, Augustin F, Oezcelik A, Lipham JC, Sohn HJ, Hagen JA, DeMeester TR (2010) Long-term follow-up after anti-reflux surgery in patients with Barrett’s esophagus. J Gastrointest Surg 14:1483–1491CrossRefPubMed Zehetner J, DeMeester SR, Ayazi S, Costales JL, Augustin F, Oezcelik A, Lipham JC, Sohn HJ, Hagen JA, DeMeester TR (2010) Long-term follow-up after anti-reflux surgery in patients with Barrett’s esophagus. J Gastrointest Surg 14:1483–1491CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Knight BC, Devitt PG, Watson DI, Smith LT, Jamieson GG, Thompson SK (2017) Long-term efficacy of laparoscopic antireflux surgery on regression of Barrett’s esophagus using BRAVO wireless pH monitoring: a prospective clinical cohort study. Ann Surg 266:1000–1005CrossRefPubMed Knight BC, Devitt PG, Watson DI, Smith LT, Jamieson GG, Thompson SK (2017) Long-term efficacy of laparoscopic antireflux surgery on regression of Barrett’s esophagus using BRAVO wireless pH monitoring: a prospective clinical cohort study. Ann Surg 266:1000–1005CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference 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 368:719–727CrossRefPubMed 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 368:719–727CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference 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 A 25:787–792CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral 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 A 25:787–792CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference 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 14:671–677CrossRefPubMed 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 14:671–677CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Rona KA, Reynolds J, Schwameis K, Zehetner J, Samakar K, Oh P, Vong D, Sandhu K, Katkhouda N, Bildzukewicz N, Lipham JC (2017) Efficacy of magnetic sphincter augmentation in patients with large hiatal hernias. Surg Endosc 31:2096–2102CrossRefPubMed Rona KA, Reynolds J, Schwameis K, Zehetner J, Samakar K, Oh P, Vong D, Sandhu K, Katkhouda N, Bildzukewicz N, Lipham JC (2017) Efficacy of magnetic sphincter augmentation in patients with large hiatal hernias. Surg Endosc 31:2096–2102CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Buckley FP 3rd, Bell RCW, Freeman K, Doggett S, Heidrick R (2018) Favorable results from a prospective evaluation of 200 patients with large hiatal hernias undergoing LINX magnetic sphincter augmentation. Surg Endosc 32:1762–1768CrossRefPubMed Buckley FP 3rd, Bell RCW, Freeman K, Doggett S, Heidrick R (2018) Favorable results from a prospective evaluation of 200 patients with large hiatal hernias undergoing LINX magnetic sphincter augmentation. Surg Endosc 32:1762–1768CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Kuckelman JP, Phillips CJ, Hardin MO, Martin MJ (2017) Standard vs expanded indications for esophageal magnetic sphincter augmentation for reflux disease. JAMA Surg 152:890–891CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kuckelman JP, Phillips CJ, Hardin MO, Martin MJ (2017) Standard vs expanded indications for esophageal magnetic sphincter augmentation for reflux disease. JAMA Surg 152:890–891CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Stadlhuber RJ, Dubecz A, Meining A, Stein HJ (2015) Adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus in a patient with a magnetic sphincter augmentation device: first of many to come? Ann Thorac Surg 99:e147–e148CrossRefPubMed Stadlhuber RJ, Dubecz A, Meining A, Stein HJ (2015) Adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus in a patient with a magnetic sphincter augmentation device: first of many to come? Ann Thorac Surg 99:e147–e148CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Komanduri S, Kahrilas PJ, Krishnan K, McGorisk T, Bidari K, Grande D, Keefer L, Pandolfino J (2017) Recurrence of Barrett’s esophagus is rare following endoscopic eradication therapy coupled with effective reflux control. Am J Gastroenterol 112:556–566CrossRefPubMed Komanduri S, Kahrilas PJ, Krishnan K, McGorisk T, Bidari K, Grande D, Keefer L, Pandolfino J (2017) Recurrence of Barrett’s esophagus is rare following endoscopic eradication therapy coupled with effective reflux control. Am J Gastroenterol 112:556–566CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Rudolph RE, Vaughan TL, Storer BE, Haggitt RC, Rabinovitch PS, Levine DS, Reid BJ (2000) Effect of segment length on risk for neoplastic progression in patients with Barrett esophagus. Ann Intern Med 132:612–620CrossRefPubMed Rudolph RE, Vaughan TL, Storer BE, Haggitt RC, Rabinovitch PS, Levine DS, Reid BJ (2000) Effect of segment length on risk for neoplastic progression in patients with Barrett esophagus. Ann Intern Med 132:612–620CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Gurski RR, Peters JH, Hagen JA, DeMeester SR, Bremner CG, Chandrasoma PT, DeMeester TR (2003) Barrett’s esophagus can and does regress after antireflux surgery: a study of prevalence and predictive features. J Am Coll Surg 196:706–712. (discussion 712–703) CrossRefPubMed Gurski RR, Peters JH, Hagen JA, DeMeester SR, Bremner CG, Chandrasoma PT, DeMeester TR (2003) Barrett’s esophagus can and does regress after antireflux surgery: a study of prevalence and predictive features. J Am Coll Surg 196:706–712. (discussion 712–703) CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference DeMeester SR, Campos GM, DeMeester TR, Bremner CG, Hagen JA, Peters JH, Crookes PF (1998) The impact of an antireflux procedure on intestinal metaplasia of the cardia. Ann Surg 228:547–556CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral DeMeester SR, Campos GM, DeMeester TR, Bremner CG, Hagen JA, Peters JH, Crookes PF (1998) The impact of an antireflux procedure on intestinal metaplasia of the cardia. Ann Surg 228:547–556CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Maret-Ouda J, Konings P, Lagergren J, Brusselaers N (2016) Antireflux surgery and risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 263:251–257CrossRefPubMed Maret-Ouda J, Konings P, Lagergren J, Brusselaers N (2016) Antireflux surgery and risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 263:251–257CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Regression of intestinal metaplasia following magnetic sphincter augmentation device placement
Authors
Evan T. Alicuben
James M. Tatum
Nikolai Bildzukewicz
Kamran Samakar
Jamil S. Samaan
Einav N. Silverstein
Kulmeet Sandhu
Caitlin C. Houghton
John C. Lipham
Publication date
01-02-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 2/2019
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6367-x

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

Surgical Endoscopy 2/2019 Go to the issue