James M Tatum1, Evan Alicuben1, Nikolai Bildzukewicz1, Kamran Samakar1, Caitlin C Houghton1, John C Lipham2. 1. Division of Upper GI and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of University Of Southern California, 1450 San Pablo StreetHealthcare Consultation Center 4Suite 6200, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA. 2. Division of Upper GI and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of University Of Southern California, 1510 San Pablo St. Suite 510, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA. John.Lipham@med.usc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recurrent or persistent symptoms of reflux, dysphagia, or device erosion can lead to removal of the magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA aka Linx) device. Device removal has been previously reported, and outcomes of various surgical management strategies at the time of removal have not been well described. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients undergoing MSA removal from March 2009 to September 2017 in a single institution. Reason for removal, operative management, and short-term outcomes are reported. RESULTS: During the study, 435 MSA devices were implanted, 24 of which required removal (5.5%). Removal was due to refractory dysphagia in 1.8% (8/435), for recurrent or persistent GERD in 2.9% (13/435), and secondary to erosion in 0.5% (2/435). Mean time from implant to removal was 863 days (range 119-1762 days). The most common reasons for removal were recurrent GERD (54%), dysphagia (38%), or erosion (8%). Significant operative findings included recurrent or progressive hiatal hernia (38%), erosion (8%), and normal anatomy (46%). Hiatal hernia was found and repaired at the time of device removal in 38% of patients (9/24). The MSA device was removed through laparotomy (4%), laparoscopically (88%), or through a combination of endoscopy and laparoscopy (8%). After removal patients underwent repeat MSA (33%), fundoplication (21%), gastrectomy (4%), or no additional procedure (42%). Symptoms prompting removal of the MSA device had resolved in 52% of patients and improved in an additional 35% at last contact. Of the 10 patients having no anti-reflux procedure after removal, 9 were available for follow-up at a mean of 97 (106) days of whom 22.2% (2/9) had symptoms of GERD or required any anti-reflux medication. No major complications occurred after removal. CONCLUSION: MSA removal when necessary can be accomplished through minimally invasive means. Repeat Linx or fundoplication can be performed after removal, however may not be necessary in patients with removal for dysphagia.
BACKGROUND: Recurrent or persistent symptoms of reflux, dysphagia, or device erosion can lead to removal of the magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA aka Linx) device. Device removal has been previously reported, and outcomes of various surgical management strategies at the time of removal have not been well described. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients undergoing MSA removal from March 2009 to September 2017 in a single institution. Reason for removal, operative management, and short-term outcomes are reported. RESULTS: During the study, 435 MSA devices were implanted, 24 of which required removal (5.5%). Removal was due to refractory dysphagia in 1.8% (8/435), for recurrent or persistent GERD in 2.9% (13/435), and secondary to erosion in 0.5% (2/435). Mean time from implant to removal was 863 days (range 119-1762 days). The most common reasons for removal were recurrent GERD (54%), dysphagia (38%), or erosion (8%). Significant operative findings included recurrent or progressive hiatal hernia (38%), erosion (8%), and normal anatomy (46%). Hiatal hernia was found and repaired at the time of device removal in 38% of patients (9/24). The MSA device was removed through laparotomy (4%), laparoscopically (88%), or through a combination of endoscopy and laparoscopy (8%). After removal patients underwent repeat MSA (33%), fundoplication (21%), gastrectomy (4%), or no additional procedure (42%). Symptoms prompting removal of the MSA device had resolved in 52% of patients and improved in an additional 35% at last contact. Of the 10 patients having no anti-reflux procedure after removal, 9 were available for follow-up at a mean of 97 (106) days of whom 22.2% (2/9) had symptoms of GERD or required any anti-reflux medication. No major complications occurred after removal. CONCLUSION:MSA removal when necessary can be accomplished through minimally invasive means. Repeat Linx or fundoplication can be performed after removal, however may not be necessary in patients with removal for dysphagia.
Entities:
Keywords:
GERD; LINX; Linx removal; MSA; Magnetic sphincter augmentation
Authors: Luigi Bonavina; Tom DeMeester; Paul Fockens; Daniel Dunn; Greta Saino; Davide Bona; John Lipham; Willem Bemelman; Robert A Ganz Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Abhishek D Parmar; Robert A Tessler; Howard Y Chang; Jonathan D Svahn Journal: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 1.878
Authors: Kais A Rona; Jessica Reynolds; Katrin Schwameis; Joerg Zehetner; Kamran Samakar; Paul Oh; David Vong; Kulmeet Sandhu; Namir Katkhouda; Nikolai Bildzukewicz; John C Lipham Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-08-23 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Jessica L Reynolds; Joerg Zehetner; Phil Wu; Shawn Shah; Nikolai Bildzukewicz; John C Lipham Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: C Daniel Smith; Robert A Ganz; John C Lipham; Reginald C Bell; David W Rattner Journal: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A Date: 2017-04-21 Impact factor: 1.878
Authors: Robert A Ganz; Jeffrey H Peters; Santiago Horgan; Willem A Bemelman; Christy M Dunst; Steven A Edmundowicz; John C Lipham; James D Luketich; W Scott Melvin; Brant K Oelschlager; Steven C Schlack-Haerer; C Daniel Smith; Christopher C Smith; Dan Dunn; Paul A Taiganides Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-02-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rudolf J Stadlhuber; Amr El Sherif; Sumeet K Mittal; Robert J Fitzgibbons; L Michael Brunt; John G Hunter; Tom R Demeester; Lee L Swanstrom; C Daniel Smith; Charles J Filipi Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2008-12-06 Impact factor: 4.584