The Impact of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation (MSA) on Esophagogastric Junction (EGJ) and Esophageal Body Physiology and Manometric Characteristics

Impact of Change in Sizing Protocol on Outcome of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) device sizing protocols on postoperative outcomes and dysphagia.

BACKGROUND

Among predictors of dysphagia after MSA, device size is the only factor that may be modified. Many centers have adopted protocols to increase device size. However, there are limited data on the impact of MSA device upsizing protocols on surgical outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent MSA were implanted with 2 or 3 beads above the sizing device's pop-off point (POP). Clinical and objective outcomes >1 year after surgery were compared between patients implanted with POP+2-versus-POP+3 sizing protocols. Multiple subgroups were analyzed for the benefit of upsizing. Preoperative and postoperative characteristics were compared between the size patients received, regardless of protocol.

RESULTS

A total of 388 patients were implanted under POP+2 and 216 under POP+3. At a mean of 14.2 (7.9) months, pH normalization was 73.6% and 34.1% required dilation, 15.9% developed persistent dysphagia, and 4.0% required removal. The sizing protocol had no impact on persistent dysphagia ( P =0.908), pH normalization ( P =0.822), or need for dilation ( P =0.210) or removal ( P =0.191). Subgroup analysis found that upsizing reduced dysphagia in patients with <80% peristalsis (10.3% vs 31%, P =0.048) or distal contractile integral >5000 (0% vs 30.4%, P =0.034). Regardless of sizing protocol, as device size increased there was a stepwise increase in the percent male sex ( P <0.0001), body mass index >30 ( P <0.0001), and preoperative hiatal hernia >3 cm ( P <0.0001), Los Angeles grade C/D esophagitis ( P <0.0001), and DeMeester score ( P <0.0001). Increased size was associated with decreased pH normalization ( P <0.0001) and need for dilation ( P =0.043) or removal ( P =0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

Upsizing from POP+2 to POP+3 does not reduce dysphagia or affect other MSA outcomes; however, patients with poor peristalsis or hypercontractile esophagus do benefit. Regardless of sizing protocol, preoperative clinical characteristics varied among device sizes, suggesting size is not a modifiable factor, but a surrogate for esophageal circumference.

Gas-Bloat Syndrome after Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation: Incidence, Natural History, Risk Factors, and Impact on Surgical Outcomes Over Time

BACKGROUND

The notion that gas-bloat syndrome (GBS) after magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is less detrimental has not been substantiated by data. This study aimed to identify the incidence, natural history, risk factors, and impact on outcomes of GBS after MSA.

STUDY DESIGN

Records of patients who underwent MSA at our institution were reviewed. GBS was defined as a score of 4 or more on the gas bloat-specific item within the GERD health-related quality-of-life (GERD-HRQL) questionnaire. Preoperative clinical and objective testing data were compared between those with and without GBS at 1 year using univariate followed by multivariable analysis. GBS evolution over time and its impact on outcomes were assessed in those with 1- and 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 489 patients underwent MSA. At a mean (SD) follow-up of 12.8 (2.1) months, patient satisfaction was 88.8%, 91.2% discontinued antisecretory medications, and 74.2% achieved DeMeester score normalization.At 1 year, 13.3% of patients developed GBS, and had worse GERD-HRQL scores and antisecretory medication use and satisfaction (p < 0.0001). DeMeester score normalization was comparable (p = 0.856). Independent predictors of GBS were bloating (odds ratio [OR] 1.8, p = 0.043), GERD-HRQL score greater than 30 (OR 3, p = 0.0010), and MSA size 14 or less beads (OR 2.5, p = 0.004). In a subgroup of 239 patients with 2-year follow-up, 70.4% of patients with GBS at 1 year had resolution by 2 years. The GERD-HRQL total score improved when GBS resolved from 11 (7 to 19) to 7 (4 to 10), p = 0.016. Patients with persistent GBS at 2 years had worse 2-year GERD-HRQL total scores (20 [5 to 31] vs 5 [3 to 12], p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

GBS affects 13.3% of patients at 1 year after MSA and substantially diminishes outcomes. However, GBS resolves spontaneously with quality-of-life improvement. Patients with preoperative bloating, high GERD-HRQL scores, or small MSA devices are at greatest risk of this complication.

Esophageal body adaptation to Nissen fundoplication: Increased esophagogastric outflow resistance yields delayed and sustained peristaltic contractions without increased amplitude

BACKGROUND

Improvement in lower esophageal sphincter (LES) competency after laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) is well established, yet esophageal body physiology data are limited. We aimed to describe the impact of LNF on whole esophagus physiology using standard and novel manometric characteristics.

METHODS

A cohort of patients with an intact fundoplication without herniation and no postoperative dysphagia were selected and underwent esophageal manometry at one-year after surgery. Pre- and post-operative manometry files were reanalyzed using standard and novel manometric characteristics and compared.

KEY RESULTS

A total of 95 patients were included in this study. At 16.1 (8.7) months LNF increased LES overall and abdominal length and resting pressure (p < 0.0001). Outflow resistance (IRP) increased [5.8 (3-11) to 11.1 (9-15), p < 0.0001] with a 95th percentile of 20 mmHg in this cohort of dysphagia-free patients. Distal contractile integral (DCI) also increased [1177.0 (667-2139) to 1321.1 (783-2895), p = 0.002], yet contractile amplitude was unchanged (p = 0.158). There were direct correlations between pre- and post-operative DCI [R: 0.727 (0.62-0.81), p < 0.0001] and postoperative DCI and postoperative IRP [R: 0.347 (0.16-0.51), p = 0.0006]. Contractile front velocity [3.5 (3-4) to 3.2 (3-4), p = 0.0013] was slower, while distal latency [6.7 (6-8) to 7.4 (7-9), p < 0.0001], the interval from swallow onset to proximal smooth muscle initiation [4.0 (4-5) to 4.4 (4-5), p = 0.0002], and the interval from swallow onset to point when the peristaltic wave meets the LES [9.4 (8-10) to 10.3 (9-12), p < 0.0001] were longer. Esophageal length [21.9 (19-24) to 23.2 (21-25), p < 0.0001] and transition zone (TZ) length [2.2 (1-3) to 2.5 (1-4), p = 0.004] were longer. Bolus clearance was inversely correlated with TZ length (p = 0.0002) and time from swallow onset to proximal smooth muscle initiation (p < 0.0001). Bolus clearance and UES characteristics were unchanged (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Increased outflow resistance after LNF required an increased DCI. However, this increased contractile vigor was achieved through sustained, not stronger, peristaltic contractions. Increased esophageal length was associated with increased TZ and delayed initiation of smooth muscle contractions.

Need for frequent dilations after magnetic sphincter augmentation: an assessment of associated factors and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Dysphagia is the most common complaint after magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA), with nearly one-third of patients requiring at least one dilation following MSA. A subset of patients require frequent dilations, but there is a paucity of data on the characteristics of this population. This study aimed to identify predictors of the need for frequent dilations within the first year after implant and to assess these patients' outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients who underwent MSA over an 8-year period. Frequent dilations were defined as 2 or more dilations within 1 year of surgery. Patients completed baseline and 1-year postoperative GERD-HRQL questionnaires and objective physiology testing. Baseline demographic, clinical characteristics, and objective testing data were compared between patients who did and did not require frequent dilations.

RESULTS

A total of 697 (62.7% female) patients underwent MSA, with 62 (8.9%) patients requiring frequent dilation. At a mean (SD) of 12.3 (3.4) months follow-up, the frequent dilation group had higher median GERD-HRQL total scores (21.0 vs. 5.0, p < 0.001), PPI use (20.8% vs.10.1%, p = 0.023), dissatisfaction (46.7% vs. 11.6%, p < 0.001), and device removal (25.8% vs. 2.2%, p < 0.001) rates. Acid normalization was comparable (p = 0.997). Independent predictors of frequent dilation included preoperative odynophagia (OR 2.85; p = 0.001), IRP > 15 mmHg (OR 2.88; p = 0.006), and > 30% incomplete bolus clearance (OR 1.94; p = 0.004). At a mean (SD) of 15.7 (10.7) months, 28 (45.1%) patients underwent device removal after frequent dilation. Independent predictors of device removal after frequent dilation within 5 years of surgery were preoperative odynophagia (OR 7.18; p = 0.042), LES resting pressure > 45 mmHg (OR 28.5; p = 0.005), and ≥ 10% failed swallows (OR 23.5; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The need for frequent dilations after MSA is a marker for poor symptom control, dissatisfaction, and device removal. Patients with preoperative odynophagia, high LES pressures, and poor esophageal motility should be counseled of their risk for these poor outcomes.

Ineffective esophageal motility: The impact of change of criteria in Chicago Classification version 4.0 on predicting outcome after magnetic sphincter augmentation

BACKGROUND

The most recent update of the Chicago Classification (CCv4.0) attempts to provide a more clinically relevant definition for ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). The impact of this new definition on predicting outcome after antireflux surgery is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare utility of IEM diagnosis based on CCv4.0 to CCv3.0 in predicting surgical outcome after magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) and to assess any additional parameters that hold value in future definitions.

METHODS

Records of 336 patients who underwent MSA at our institution between 2013 and 2020 were reviewed. Preoperative manometry files were re-analyzed using both Chicago Classification version 3.0 (CCv3.0) and CCv4.0 definitions of IEM. The utility of each IEM definition in predicting surgical outcome was then compared. Individual manometric components and impedance data were also assessed.

KEY RESULTS

Immediate dysphagia was reported by 186 (55.4%) and persistent dysphagia by 42 (12.5%) patients. CCv3.0 IEM criteria were met by 37 (11%) and CCv4.0 IEM by 18 (5.4%) patients (p = 0.011). CCv3.0 and CCv4.0 IEM were equally poor predictors of immediate (AUC = 0.503 vs. 0.512, p = 0.7482) and persistent (AUC = 0.519 vs. 0.510, p = 0.7544) dysphagia. The predicted dysphagia probability of less than 70% bolus clearance (BC) was 17.4%, higher than CCv4.0 IEM at 16.7%. When BC was incorporated into CCv4.0 IEM criteria, the probability increased significantly to 30.0% (p = 0.0042).

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

The CCv3.0 and CCv4.0 of IEM are poor predictors of dysphagia after MSA. Adding BC to the new definition improves its predictive utility and should be considered in future definitions.

Magnetic sphincter augmentation as treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease after sleeve gastrectomy

The sleeve gastrectomy's efficacy for the reduction of excess weight- and obesity-related comorbidities has been consistently demonstrated though the improvement of postoperative reflux symptoms has been questionable. The purpose of this article is to offer a diagnostic and treatment algorithm for patients suffering from GERD after the sleeve gastrectomy. This article is comprised of recommendations of from a single expert bariatric and foregut surgeon. While previously thought to be a relative contraindication, evidence suggests that select patients with a history of sleeve gastrectomy can safely and effectively undergo magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) and achieve improved control of reflux and discontinuation of PPIs. Concomitant hiatal hernia repair with MSA is recommended. MSA is a fantastic strategy for managing GERD after sleeve gastrectomy with careful patient selection.

Removal of the magnetic sphincter augmentation device: an assessment of etiology, clinical presentation, and management

BACKGROUND

Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) erosion, disruption or displacement clearly requires device removal. However, up to 5.5% of patients without anatomical failure require removal for dysphagia or recurrent GERD symptoms. Studies characterizing these patients or their management are limited. We aimed to characterize these patients, compare their outcomes, and determine the necessity for further reflux surgery.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 777 patients who underwent MSA at our institution between 2013 and 2021. Patients who underwent device removal for persistent dysphagia or recurrent GERD symptoms were included. Demographic, clinical, objective testing, and quality of life data obtained preoperatively, after implantation and following removal were compared between removal for dysphagia and GERD groups. Sub-analyses were performed comparing outcomes with and without an anti-reflux surgery (ARS) at the time of removal.

RESULTS

A total of 40 (5.1%) patients underwent device removal, 31 (77.5%) for dysphagia and 9 (22.5%) for GERD. After implantation, dysphagia patients had less heartburn (12.9-vs-77.7%, p = 0.0005) less regurgitation (16.1-vs-55.5%, p = 0.0286), and more pH-normalization (91.7-vs-33.3%, p = 0.0158). Removal without ARS was performed in 5 (55.6%) GERD and 22 (71.0%) dysphagia patients. Removal for dysphagia patients had more complete symptom resolution (63.6-vs-0.0%, p = 0.0159), freedom from PPIs (81.8-vs-0.0%, p = 0.0016) and pH-normalization (77.8-vs-0.0%, p = 0.0455). Patients who underwent removal for dysphagia had comparable symptom resolution (p = 0.6770, freedom from PPI (p = 0.3841) and pH-normalization (p = 0.2534) with or without ARS. Those who refused ARS with removal for GERD had more heartburn (100.0%-vs-25.0%, p = 0.0476), regurgitation (80.0%-vs-0.0%, p = 0.0476) and PPI use (75.0%-vs-0.0%, p = 0.0476).

CONCLUSIONS

MSA removal outcomes are dependent on the indication for removal. Removal for dysphagia yields excellent outcomes regardless of anti-reflux surgery. Patients with persistent GERD had worse outcomes on all measures without ARS. We propose a tailored approach to MSA removal-based indication for removal.

Real-world evidence with magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a scoping review

Background

The burden of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is high, with up to 30% of the Western population reporting reflux-related symptoms with or without hiatal hernia. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is a standardized laparoscopic procedure for patients who are dissatisfied with medical therapy and for those with early-stage disease who would not usually be considered ideal candidates for fundoplication. The MSA device is manufactured in different sizes and is designed to augment the physiologic barrier to reflux by magnetic force.

Methods

An extensive scoping review was performed to provide a map of current evidence with respect to MSA, to identify gaps in knowledge, and to make recommendations for future research. All the authors contributed to the literature search in PubMed and Web of Science and contributed to summarizing the evidence.

Results

Magnetic sphincter augmentation, especially in combination with crural repair, is effective in reducing GERD symptoms, proton pump inhibitor use, and esophageal acid exposure, and in improving patients’ quality of life. Safety issues such as device erosion or migration have been rare and not associated with mortality. The MSA device can be removed laparoscopically if necessary, thereby preserving the option of fundoplication or other therapies in the future. Contraindication to scanning in high-power Tesla magnetic resonance systems remains a potential limitation of the MSA procedure. High-resolution manometry and functional lumen imaging probes appear to be promising tools to predict procedural outcomes by improving reflux control and reducing the incidence of dysphagia.

Conclusion

A consensus on acquisition and interpretation of high-resolution manometry and impedance planimetry data is needed to gain better understanding of physiology, to improve patient selection, and to pave the way for a personalized surgical approach in antireflux surgery.

Feasibility and Efficacy of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation for the Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Post-Sleeve Gastrectomy for Obesity

BACKGROUND

Patients with medically intractable GERD after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) have limited surgical options. Fundoplication is difficult post-LSG. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass may be used as a conversion procedure but is more invasive with potential for serious complications. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is a less invasive GERD treatment alternative. The objective of this study was to assess safety and efficacy outcomes of MSA after LSG.

METHODS

The primary outcome of this observational, multicenter, single-arm prospective study was the rate of serious device and/or procedure-related adverse events (AEs). The efficacy of the LINX device was measured comparing baseline to 12-month post-implant reductions in distal acid exposure, GERD-HRQL score, and average daily PPI usage.

RESULTS

Thirty subjects who underwent MSA implantation were followed 12 months post-implant. No unanticipated adverse device effects were observed. There were two adverse events deemed serious (dysphagia, pain, 6.7%) which resolved without sequelae. GERD-HRQL scores showed significant improvement (80.8%, P < 0.001), and reduction in daily PPI usage was seen (95.8%, P < 0.001). Forty-four percent of subjects demonstrated normalization or >  = 50% reduction of total distal acid exposure time (baseline 16.2%, 12 months 11%; P = 0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

Post-LSG, MSA showed an overall improvement of GERD symptoms, and reduction in PPI use with explants within anticipated range along with improvement in distal esophageal acid exposure time.

Esophageal retention cyst: Esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO) as a potential etiology and management with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR)

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Esophageal retention cysts are acquired cysts with no known etiology. They are characterized by dilation of the submucosal glands. Symptomatic cysts are traditionally managed by surgical resection.

CASE PRESENTATION

We present a case of progressive dysphagia and chest pain secondary to esophageal retention cysts in the mid and distal esophagus with associated esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO) and jackhammer esophagus on high resolution manometry (HRM). The patient underwent staged endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with subsequent improvement in her symptoms. However, EGJOO persisted after resection, suggesting it was the primary pathology and not a consequence of the obstruction from the cysts.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

Esophageal retention cysts are rarely reported in the literature with most descriptions coming from incidental post-mortems. The presented case suggests EGJOO as a potential etiology of retention cysts. The proposed mechanism is that a significant rise in esophageal intraluminal pressure creates a state of stasis in the esophagus, ideal for the development of these cysts. Symptomatic or malignant retention cysts should be resected. We demonstrate the feasibility of EMR as an alternative to surgical resection.

CONCLUSION

Esophageal retention cyst is a rare entity, which may arise as a result of EGJOO. The natural history and malignant potential of these cysts are unknown, and no formal guidelines have been established for follow-up for patients with asymptomatic retention cysts. Endoscopic mucosal resection can be used to successfully manage these cysts.

Laparoscopic management of pathologic gastroesophageal reflux after sleeve gastrectomy using the magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) device-a Video Vignette

Purpose

The development of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been shown to be not infrequent after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Management may vary from medical therapy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) conversion. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) device has been shown to be a promising option with excellent results. The purpose of this video was to demonstrate the laparoscopic management of post-LSG GERD with MSA device implant.

Materials and Methods

An intraoperative video has been edited to demonstrate the MSA device placement after LSG for the treatment of pathologic GERD.

Results

The procedure started with the lysis of the perigastric adhesions to free the distal esophagus circumferentially. The posterior vagus nerve was identified, and a small window was created between the posterior esophageal wall anteriorly and the vagus nerve posteriorly. A hiatoplasty was performed using two non-resorbable interrupted 2.0 Prolene® sutures. The system’s sizer was placed to measure the junctional circumference. A 15-mm MSA device was implanted.

Conclusion

MSA device placement seems technically feasible and safe with promising results in term of improved LES resting pressure and esophageal acid exposure. While future studies are necessary to corroborate these preliminary indications, MSA device may possibly become a valid option in surgeon armamentarium.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11695-022-06007-x.