Antireflux mucosectomy (ARMS) and antireflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rodriguez de Santiago E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8589565 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundEndoscopic treatments are increasingly being offered for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Three procedures have similar concepts and techniques: antireflux mucosectomy (ARMS), antireflux mucosal ablation (ARMA), and antireflux band ligation (ARBL); we have collectively termed them antireflux mucosal intervention (ARMI). Here, we systematically reviewed the clinical outcomes and technical aspects.MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to October 2021. The primary outcome was the clinical success rate. The secondary outcomes were acid exposure time, DeMeester score, need for proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), endoscopic findings, and adverse events.ResultsFifteen studies were included. The pooled clinical success rate was 73.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 69%-78%) overall, 68.6% (95% CI = 62.2%-74.4%) with ARMS, 86.7% (95% CI = 78.7%-91.9%) with ARMA, and 76.5% (95% CI = 65%-85.1%) with ARBL. ARMI resulted in significantly improved acid exposure time, DeMeester score, and degree of hiatal hernia. Furthermore, 10% of patients had dysphagia requiring endoscopic dilatation after ARMS or ARMA, and ARMS was associated with a 2.2% perforation rate. By contrast, no bleeding, perforation, or severe dysphagia was noted with ARBL. Severe hiatal hernia (Hill grade III) may predict treatment failure with ARMA.ConclusionsThe three ARMI procedures were efficacious and safe for PPI-refractory GERD. ARMA and ARBL may be preferred over ARMS because of fewer adverse events and similar efficacy. Further studies are necessary to determine the optimal technique and patient selection.
| S-EPMC9058334 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aims Anti-reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) is an emerging endoscopic treatment for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy ARMS in refractory GERD. Methods A comprehensive search of multiple databases (through March 2020) was performed to identify studies that reported outcomes of ARMS for refractory GERD. Outcomes assessed included technical success, clinical response, and adverse events (AEs). Clinical response was defined as discontinuation (complete) or reduction (partial) of proton pump inhibitors post-ARMS at follow up. Results A total of 307 patients (mean age 46.9 [8.1] years, 41.5 % females) were included from 10 studies. The technical success and clinical response rates were 97.7 % (95 % confidence interval [CI], 94.6-99.0) and 80.1 % (95 % CI, 61.6-91.0), respectively. The pooled rate of complete and partial clinical response was 65.3 % (95 % CI, 51.4-77.0) and 21.5 % (95 % CI, 14.2-31.2), respectively. The rate of AEs was 17.2 % (95 % CI, 13.1-22.2) with most common AE being dysphagia/esophageal stricture followed by bleeding with rates of 11.4 % and 5.0 %, respectively. GERD health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) (mean difference [MD] = 14.9, P < 0.001), GERD questionnaire (GERD-Q) (MD = 4.85, P < 0.001) and mean acid exposure time (MD = 2.39, P = 0.01) decreased significantly post-ARMS as compared to pre-procedure. There was no difference in terms of clinical response and AEs between ARMS and ARMS with banding on subgroup analysis. Conclusions ARMS is a safe and effective procedure for treatment of refractory GERD with high rates of clinical response, acceptable safety profile and significant improvement in GERD-related quality of life. Prospective studies are needed to validate our findings.
| S-EPMC9187426 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceCohort studies, mainly based on questionnaires and interviews, have reported high rates of reflux recurrence after antireflux surgery, which may have contributed to a decline in its use. Reflux recurrence after laparoscopic antireflux surgery has not been assessed in a long-term population-based study of unselected patients.ObjectivesTo determine the risk of reflux recurrence after laparoscopic antireflux surgery and to identify risk factors for recurrence.Design and settingNationwide population-based retrospective cohort study in Sweden between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2014, based on all Swedish health care and including 2655 patients who underwent laparoscopic antireflux surgery according to the Swedish Patient Registry. Their records were linked to the Swedish Causes of Death Registry and Prescribed Drug Registry.ExposuresPrimary laparoscopic antireflux surgery due to gastroesophageal reflux disease in adults (>18 years).Main outcomes and measuresThe outcome was recurrence of reflux, defined as use of antireflux medication (proton pump inhibitors or histamine2 receptor antagonists for >6 months) or secondary antireflux surgery. Multivariable Cox regression was used to assess risk factors for reflux recurrence.ResultsAmong all 2655 patients who underwent antireflux surgery (median age, 51.0 years; interquartile range, 40.0-61.0 years; 1354 men [51.0%]) and were followed up for a median of 5.6 years, 470 patients (17.7%) had reflux recurrence; 393 (83.6%) received long-term antireflux medication and 77 (16.4%) underwent secondary antireflux surgery. Risk factors for reflux recurrence included female sex (hazard ratio [HR], 1.57 [95% CI, 1.29-1.90]; 286 of 1301 women [22.0%] and 184 of 1354 men [13.6%] had recurrence of reflux), older age (HR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.10-1.81] for age ≥61 years compared with ≤45 years; recurrence among 156 of 715 patients and 133 of 989 patients, respectively), and comorbidity (HR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.13-1.65] for Charlson comorbidity index score ≥1 compared with 0; recurrence among 180 of 804 patients and 290 of 1851 patients, respectively). Hospital volume of antireflux surgery was not associated with risk of reflux recurrence (HR, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.77-1.53] for hospital volume ≤24 surgeries compared with ≥76 surgeries; recurrence among 38 of 266 patients [14.3%] and 271 of 1526 patients [17.8%], respectively).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients who underwent primary laparoscopic antireflux surgery, 17.7% experienced recurrent gastroesophageal reflux requiring long-term medication use or secondary antireflux surgery. Risk factors for recurrence were older age, female sex, and comorbidity. Laparoscopic antireflux surgery was associated with a relatively high rate of recurrent gastroesophageal reflux disease requiring treatment, diminishing some of the benefits of the operation.
| S-EPMC5818853 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Up to 40% of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) report persistent symptoms despite proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. This review outlines the evidence for surgical and endoscopic therapies for the treatment of PPI nonresponsive GERD. A literature search for GERD therapies from 2005 to 2015 in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews identified 2928 unique citations. Of those, 45 unique articles specific to surgical and endoscopic therapies for PPI nonresponsive GERD were reviewed. Laparoscopic fundoplication (n = 19) provides symptomatic and physiologic relief out to 10 years, though efficacy wanes with time. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (n = 6) and transoral incisionless fundoplication (n = 9) improve symptoms in PPI nonresponders and may offer fewer side effects than fundoplication, though long-term follow-up is lacking. Radiofrequency energy delivery (n = 8) has insufficient evidence for routine use in treating PPI nonresponsive GERD. Electrical stimulator implantation (n = 1) and endoscopic mucosal surgery (n = 2) are newer therapies under evaluation for the treatment of GERD. Laparoscopic fundoplication remains the most proven therapeutic approach. Newer antireflux procedures such as magnetic sphincter augmentation and transoral incisionless fundoplication offer alternatives with varying degrees of success, durability, and side effect profiles that may better suit individual patients. Larger head-to-head comparison trials are needed to better characterize the difference in symptom response and side effect profiles.
| S-EPMC5789775 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Gastroesophageal reflux (GER) is a functional self-limiting condition in neonates. When pathologic, it is called GER disease (GERD). There are wide variations in the management of signs, symptoms, and complications associated with GERD in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Evidence does not support an empiric trial of GERD medications as a diagnostic tool or therapy in premature infants.MethodsA multidisciplinary team developed evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for GERD management. Process improvement included developing a GERD management algorithm, electronic order sets, and education for all providers. Multiple plan-do-study-act cycles done.ResultsImplementation of standardized GERD management guideline, decreased the overall use of antireflux medications from baseline, 15.1%-6.8% [χ2 (1, N = 1259) = 12.98, P < 0.001]. There was elimination of GERD medication use in preterm from baseline of 19.3% [χ2 (1, N = 220) = 12.18, P < 0.001]. The most frequently used GERD medication was lansoprazole, with an incorrect initial dosing rate of 55.0% that deceased to zero [χ2 (1, N = 33) = 10.73, P = 0.001]. Appropriate testing with PH probe with 24-hour multichannel impedance was observed (17.1%-28.0%) identifying patients with correct GERD diagnosis [χ2 (1, N = 101) = 1.41, P = 0.236]. Length of stay for GERD patient's improved from a median of 89-53 days.ConclusionStandardizing clinical management leads to best practices for GERD management with appropriate diagnostic testing, eliminating incorrect medication dosing, and improved patient safety with value-based outcomes.
| S-EPMC7952116 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about the role of muscularis mucosa at the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ).AimTo evaluate the movement of the mucosa/muscularis-mucosa/submucosa (MMS) at the GEJ in normal subjects and in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).MethodsGastroesophageal junctions of 20 non-GERD subjects and 10 patients with GERD were evaluated during 5 mL swallows using two methods: in high-resolution endoluminal ultrasound and manometry, the change in the GEJ luminal pressures and cross-sectional area of esophageal wall layers were measured; in abdominal ultrasound, the MMS movement at the GEJ was analyzed.ResultsEndoluminal ultrasound: In the non-GERD subjects, the gastric MMS moved rostrally into the distal esophagus at 2.17 s after the bolus first reached the GEJ. In GERD patients, the gastric MMS did not move rostrally into the distal esophagus. The maximum change in cross-sectional area of gastroesophageal MMS in non-GERD subjects and in GERD patients was 289 % and 183%, respectively. Abdominal ultrasound: In non-GERD subjects, the gastric MMS starts to move rostrally significantly earlier and to a greater distance than muscularis propria (MP) after the initiation of the swallow (1.75 vs. 3.00 s) and (13.97 vs. 8.91 mm). In GERD patients, there is no significant difference in the movement of gastric MMS compared to MP (6.74 vs. 6.09 mm). The independent movement of the gastric MMS in GERD subjects was significantly less than in non-GERD subjects.ConclusionIn non-GERD subjects, the gastric MMS moves rostrally into the distal esophagus during deglutitive inhibition and forms a barrier. This movement of the MMS is defective in patients with GERD.
| S-EPMC6542259 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To investigate the role of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in the development of dental disorders. METHODS:The first outcome was review of the role of reflux in the development of dental disorders in adults. The second outcome was review of the potential pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the association between reflux and dental disorders. Three investigators screened publications for eligibility and exclusion based on predetermined criteria through a literature search conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). RESULTS:From 386 publications, 24 studies were kept for analysis. Objective approaches were used in 16 studies to confirm GERD diagnosis. Pharyngeal reflux episodes (LPR) were considered in 2 studies. No study considered nonacid reflux. The study results supported a higher prevalence of dental erosion and caries in reflux patients compared with healthy individuals. Patients with dental erosion have a higher prevalence of reflux than controls. The pathophysiological mechanisms would involve changes in the saliva physiology. No study investigated the microbiota modifications related to reflux although the findings are supporting the critical role of microbiota change in the development of dental disorders. There is an important heterogeneity between studies about diagnostic methods and clinical outcome evaluation. CONCLUSION:The involvement of reflux in the development of dental disorders is not formally demonstrated and requires future investigations considering pharyngeal acid and nonacid reflux episodes and in particular their potential impact on oral microbiota.
| S-EPMC7428125 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), which leads to acid reflux into the esophagus, is a common gastrointestinal disorder. Several studies have shown the prevalence of GERD in Iranian population, but their evidence is contradictory. Therefore, the present study was conducted to investigate the epidemiology of GERD in Iran. METHODS:The entire steps of this systematic review and meta-analysis were based on the MOOSE protocol, and the results were reported accordance with the PRISMA guideline. This review is registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020142861). To find potentially relevant published articles, comprehensive search was done on international online databases Scopus, Science Direct, EMBASE, PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Iranian online databases and the Google Scholar search engine in June 2019. Cochran test and I2 index were used to assess the heterogeneity of the studies. Data were analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software ver. 2. The significance level of the test was considered to be P?<? 0.05. RESULTS:The daily, weekly, monthly, and overall prevalence of GERD symptoms in Iranian population was 5.64% (95%CI [confidence interval]: 3.77-8.35%; N?=?66,398), 12.50% (95%CI: 9.63-16.08%; N?=?110,388), 18.62% (95%CI: 12.90-26.12%; N?=?70,749) and 43.07% (95%CI: 35.00-51.53%; N?=?73,189), respectively. The daily, weekly, monthly, and overall prevalence of heartburn in Iranian population was 2.46% (95%CI: 0.93-6.39%; N?=?18,774), 9.52% (95%CI: 6.16-14.41%; N?=?54,125), 8.19% (95%CI: 2.42-24.30%; N?=?19,363) and 23.20% (95%CI: 13.56-36.79%; N?=?26,543), respectively. The daily, weekly, monthly, and overall prevalence of regurgitation in Iranian population was 4.00% (95%CI: 1.88-8.32%; N?=?18,774), 9.79% (95%CI: 5.99-15.60%; N?=?41,140), 13.76% (95%CI: 6.18-44.31%; N?=?19,363) and 36.53% (95%CI: 19.30-58.08%; N?=?21,174), respectively. The sensitivity analysis for prevalence of all types GERD, heartburn and regurgitation symptoms by removing a study showed that the overall estimate is still robust. CONCLUSION:The present meta-analysis provides comprehensive and useful information on the epidemiology of GERD in Iran for policy-makers and health care providers. This study showed a high prevalence of GERD in Iran. Therefore, effective measures on GERD-related factors such as lifestyle can be among the health policies of Iran.
| S-EPMC7488684 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is associated with a strong and severity-dependent increased risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Whether antireflux surgery prevents esophageal adenocarcinoma is a matter of uncertainty. Objectives:To examine whether antireflux surgery is associated with reduced risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma and whether the risk is different between surgically and medically treated patients. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this multinational, population-based retrospective cohort study from Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden, patients undergoing surgery were followed up for a median of 12.7 years, and a comparison group of patients receiving medication only were followed up for a median of 4.8 years. All patients with a registered diagnosis of GERD (or an associated disorder), including 48 414 individuals undergoing surgery and 894 492 receiving medication only, were included in the study. The study periods varied in the different countries depending on the year of initiation of registration and the date of data retrieval, from January 1, 1964, to December 21, 2014. Exposures:Antireflux surgery for GERD. Main Outcomes and Measures:The risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma over time after surgery was compared with that in a corresponding background population using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) with 95% CIs and with patients with GERD who received medication using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression, providing hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs adjusted for confounders. Results:In this study of 942 906 patients with GERD, 48 414 underwent antireflux surgery (median [interquartile range] age, 66.0 [58.0-73.0] years; 27 161 male [56.1%]) and 894 492 received medication only (median [interquartile range] age, 71.0 [62.0-78.0] years; 434 035 male [48.6%]). Among patients undergoing surgery, 177 developed esophageal adenocarcinoma. Esophageal adenocarcinoma risk decreased in a time-dependent manner after surgery compared with the background population (5 to <10 years after surgery: SIR, 7.63; 95% CI, 5.42-10.43; ≥15 years after surgery: SIR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.98-1.80). Among patients with more severe and objectively determined GERD, the SIRs were 10.08 (95% CI, 6.98-14.09) at 5 to less than 10 years after surgery and 1.67 (95% CI, 1.15-2.35) at 15 years or more after surgery. The risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma did not change over time in surgical patients compared with patients who received medication only (5 to <10 years after surgery: HR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.44-2.84; ≥15 years: HR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.28-2.54). The risk remained stable over time in analyses restricted to severe reflux disease (5 to <10 years after surgery: HR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.24-2.63; ≥15 years after surgery: HR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.14-2.51). Conclusions and Relevance:Medical and surgical treatment of GERD were associated with a similar reduced esophageal adenocarcinoma risk, with the risk decreasing to the same level as that in the background population over time, supporting the hypothesis that effective treatment of GERD might prevent esophageal adenocarcinoma.
| S-EPMC6248086 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background/objectivesGastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the common gastrointestinal disorders worldwide. Recent epidemiologic studies have suggested that use of statins may lower the risk of GERD although the results from different studies were inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted with the aim to summarize all available data.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE database from inception to December 2017. Cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies that compared the risk of GERD among statin users versus nonusers were included. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effect, generic inverse variance method.ResultsA total of 4 studies (1 case control, 1 cohort, and 2 cross-sectional studies) with 14,505 participants met the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The risk of GERD among statin users was numerically lower than nonusers with the pooled OR of 0.89 but the result did not achieve statistical significance (95% CI, 0.60-1.33). The statistical heterogeneity in this study was moderate (I2 = 54%).ConclusionsThe current meta-analysis found that the risk of GERD was numerically lower among statin users although the pooled result did not reach statistical significance. Therefore, more studies are still needed to further clarify this potential benefit of statins.
| S-EPMC6813684 | biostudies-literature