BACKGROUND: An alternative approach to the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has recently been introduced in clinical practice, involving the implantation of a magnetic sphincter augmentation device (MSAD). This "magnetic ring" is implanted laparoscopically around the lower esophageal sphincter to improve its barrier function. The literature is still limited on the midterm results achieved in controlling reflux because the MSAD is a very new procedure. So far, only a few cases of the MSAD causing erosion of the esophagus have been reported. METHODS: We report on two cases of progressive and severe dysphagia after the implantation of an MSAD elsewhere. In both cases, the symptoms were caused by the migration of the device into the esophagus. RESULTS: The devices were removed endoscopically in a single step in both cases, using the Olympus cutter. After 3 months, the first patient had a laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication without any complications and with a good final reflux control. The second only underwent removal of the device, using the same endoscopic approach and again without any complications. CONCLUSIONS: Judging from the literature, MSAD implantation may be an effective way to control GERD, but the method can carry major complications, such as migration of the device into the esophagus (as in the two cases reported here). Endoscopic removal of a device possibly penetrating inside the esophagus is feasible and safe, and may later be followed up with a laparoscopic antireflux procedure without any particular difficulty.
BACKGROUND: An alternative approach to the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has recently been introduced in clinical practice, involving the implantation of a magnetic sphincter augmentation device (MSAD). This "magnetic ring" is implanted laparoscopically around the lower esophageal sphincter to improve its barrier function. The literature is still limited on the midterm results achieved in controlling reflux because the MSAD is a very new procedure. So far, only a few cases of the MSAD causing erosion of the esophagus have been reported. METHODS: We report on two cases of progressive and severe dysphagia after the implantation of an MSAD elsewhere. In both cases, the symptoms were caused by the migration of the device into the esophagus. RESULTS: The devices were removed endoscopically in a single step in both cases, using the Olympus cutter. After 3 months, the first patient had a laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication without any complications and with a good final reflux control. The second only underwent removal of the device, using the same endoscopic approach and again without any complications. CONCLUSIONS: Judging from the literature, MSAD implantation may be an effective way to control GERD, but the method can carry major complications, such as migration of the device into the esophagus (as in the two cases reported here). Endoscopic removal of a device possibly penetrating inside the esophagus is feasible and safe, and may later be followed up with a laparoscopic antireflux procedure without any particular difficulty.
Entities:
Keywords:
LINX; esophageal perforation; gastroesophageal reflux; magnetic sphincter augmentation device
Authors: Evan T Alicuben; Reginald C W Bell; Blair A Jobe; F P Buckley; C Daniel Smith; Casey J Graybeal; John C Lipham Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 3.452