Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication after failure of Enteryx injection into the lower esophageal sphincter

Ensocopic-endoluminal therapies. A critical appraisal

Due to its large prevalence, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is an ideal target for companies developing medical devices designed to cure reflux. Indeed, because medications leave part of the patients unsatisfied, there is a potential place for alternative therapies, capable of restoring an efficacious anti-reflux barrier, but without the drawbacks of surgery. For more than a decade, several novel endoluminal therapies were developed, clinically evaluated, put on the market and, for many of them, withdrawn due to economic considerations, lack of efficacy or complications. These therapies were designed to act on the gastro-oesophageal junction and reinforce mechanically the anti-reflux barrier by three different ways: suturing, radiofrequency energy application, or implantation of foreign materials. Most of the published data come from open uncontrolled studies with short-term enthusiastic results. There are a few randomized control trials assessing the true efficacy of these modalities, showing often less impressive results than the open studies did, due to a high placebo effect in mild gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Although endoscopic treatment of gastro-oesophageal disease is still an interesting topic of investigation, one can draw some lessons from the recent experiences and foresee which place these techniques could find in the management of patients suffering from reflux.

Systematic review: endoluminal therapy for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: evidence from clinical trials

During the last few decades many endoscopic interventions have been developed as an alternative for the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). In many countries, these interventions are thus being performed in the general clinical setting. The aim of this study is to systematically review the evidence on the effect of endoscopic therapies for GORD. A systematic search of the literature on this subject in English, indexed in MEDLINE (1966 to May 2007) and in the Cochrane Library, was carried out. For the study selection, retrospective and prospective open-label and randomized, sham-controlled trials were taken into account. The exclusion criteria included the following: case series that included fewer than 10 patients, abstracts, studies involving children or those with a follow-up shorter than 3 months. For data extraction, two reviewers, using standardized forms, independently abstracted data on study design and methods, population, sample size, function studies (e.g. pH-metry), type of endoscopic treatment, follow-up, health-related and quality of life scores, outcomes and complications. Data synthesis involved the following: 43 studies, including four randomized, sham-controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria, out of 4182 citations. The primary end point in most studies was the reduction of the use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) by more than 50%. In view of these findings, the majority of studies suggested the efficacy of endoluminal therapies for the control of symptoms in GORD. In the sham-controlled studies, the effect of placebo was, nevertheless, as high as 50%. Most studies were small feasibility studies, with follow-ups of less than 1 year. No study comparing endoscopic techniques with other established treatment options such as PPIs existed. All endoscopic therapies were associated with a small but important percentage of mild to severe complications, which included perforation, abscess and death. In conclusion, the data from most of the short-term follow-up and the few sham-controlled studies demonstrate that subgroups of patients experienced improvement or resolution of typical GORD symptoms and decreased PPI usage. Currently, however, there are not enough scientific and clinical data on safety, efficacy and durability to support the use of endoluminal therapies for GORD in routine clinical practice.

Endoscopic therapy for GERD: is the evidence for efficacy any stronger?

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common chronic medical disorder that has a significant impact on quality of life and afflicts millions of people worldwide. Therapy with either daily medications or surgical fundoplication, though highly effective for the majority of patients, is not without long-term shortcomings. The development of endoscopic antireflux therapies has been fueled by the hope of providing safe, effective, long-term symptomatic relief. Although several studies have been published, they are limited by small sample size, lack of adequate controls, and a highly selective patient population. However, it is clear that many, if not most, patients will continue to be on acid-suppressive therapy despite these procedures. Also, reports of postmarketing adverse effects emphasize the need for further scrutiny of the safety of these devices. This review will summarize the available evidence and provide tentative conclusions about the current and evolving role of endoscopic antireflux therapy.

Enteryx for gastroesophageal reflux disease

The Enteryx procedure is an endoscopic injectable treatment for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms. Enteryx was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in April 2003 for patients who respond to, and require daily pharmacologic therapy with proton-pump inhibitors. Although gastroesophageal reflux disease is rarely life threatening, symptoms are often chronic and disabling. Therefore, safe and cost-effective alternative treatments for chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease are sought by patients, physicians and payers. Multicenter clinical trials have demonstrated that the Enteryx procedure safely and effectively eliminates, or significantly reduces, proton-pump inhibitor use in approximately 84% of patients at 1 year, and 72% of patients at 2 years.

Endoluminal therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease: is the evidence for efficacy any stronger?

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a common disorder often requiring chronic treatment. Joining the conventional options of antisecretory medications and fundoplication, endoluminal therapies have emerged in recent years. These techniques have entered US and European markets, claiming effectiveness comparable with antireflux surgery. Nevertheless, a paucity of data is available to support that efficacy, even as more devices are coming onto the market. This review examines published reports of endoluminal reflux therapies from January 2004 to January 2005. After another year, there are still no compelling data supporting the efficacy of any of the available endoluminal treatments.

Nonresorbable copolymer implantation for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a randomized sham-controlled multicenter trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

This aim was to determine whether endoscopic implantation of a biocompatible nonresorbable copolymer (Enteryx; Boston Scientific Corp, Natick, MA) is a more effective therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) than a sham procedure.

METHODS

In a randomized, single-blind, prospective, multicenter clinical trial, 64 patients with GERD were enrolled whose symptoms were well controlled by proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and rapidly recurred after cessation of PPI therapy. Thirty-two patients were assigned to Enteryx implantation and 32 to a sham procedure consisting of standard upper endoscopy. Patients in both groups with unsatisfactory symptom relief after 3 months were eligible for re-treatment by Enteryx implantation. The primary study end point was > or =50% reduction in PPI use. Secondary end points included > or =50% improvement in GERD score and the proportion of patients not undergoing re-treatment procedure. Follow-up evaluations were performed at 3 and 6 months.

RESULTS

The percentage of Enteryx-treated patients achieving a > or =50% reduction in PPI use (81%) was greater than that of the sham group (53%), with a rate ratio of 1.52 (confidence interval [CI], 1.06-2.28; P=.023). A higher proportion of the Enteryx (68%) than sham group (41%) ceased PPI use completely (rate ratio, 1.67; CI, 1.03-2.80; P=.033). GERD health-related quality of life heartburn score improvement > or =50% was achieved by 67% of the Enteryx group versus 22% of the sham group (rate ratio, 3.05; CI, 1.55-6.33; P <.001). More Enteryx-treated (81%) than sham-treated (19%) patients did not undergo re-treatment (rate ratio, 4.33; CI, 2.23-9.29; P <.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Enteryx implantation more effectively reduces PPI dependency and alleviates GERD symptoms than a sham procedure.

Robotic Laparoscopic Fundoplication

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a very common disorder, and both medical and surgical treatments have shown outstanding results. Whereas proton pump inhibitors are the mainstay of treatment, laparoscopic fundoplication has become a very attractive alternative due to its efficacy and low morbidity. There are defined patient categories that may benefit more from laparoscopy than medical therapy, but a conclusive comparison between the two is lacking. Robotic laparoscopic fundoplication can be performed safely without increased morbidity. Potential advantages include enhanced precision, improved dexterity, and remote telesurgical applications. Disadvantages include increased cost and prolonged operative times. Further studies and more long-term outcome data are needed to fully evaluate the procedure. Robotic surgery is currently in its infancy and not cost effective but has a very promising future. With further development of automatization and miniaturization features, robotic surgery may prove more efficient than conventional laparoscopy.