Development and Application of Endoscopic Antireflux Mucosectomy in Treating Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Pharynx and esophagus: Esophageal benign diseases.

No definitive treatment has been established for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Antireflux mucosectomy (ARMS) and antireflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) using argon plasma coagulation are promising methods. However, no study has compared these two. This study compared the efficacy and safety of the two procedures. This multicenter, retrospective, observational study included 274 patients; 96 and 178 patients underwent ARMA and ARMS, respectively. The primary outcome was subjective symptom improvement based on GERD questionnaire (GERDQ) scores. The secondary outcomes included changes in the presence of Barrett's esophagus, Los Angeles grade for reflux esophagitis, flap valve grade, and proton pump inhibitor withdrawal rates. The ARMS group had higher baseline GERDQ scores (10.0 vs. 8.0, P < 0.001) and a greater median postprocedure improvement than the ARMA group (4.0 vs. 2.0, P = 0.002), and even after propensity score matching adjustment, these findings remained. ARMS significantly improved reflux esophagitis compared with ARMA, with notable changes in Los Angeles grade (P < 0.001) and flap valve grade scores (P < 0.001). Improvement in Barrett's esophagus was comparable between the groups (P = 0.337), with resolution rates of 94.7% and 77.8% in the ARMS and ARMA groups, respectively. Compared with the ARMA group, the ARMS group experienced higher bleeding rates (P = 0.034), comparable stricture rates (P = 0.957), and more proton pump inhibitor withdrawals (P = 0.008). Both ARMS and ARMA showed improvements in GERDQ scores, endoscopic esophagitis, flap valve grade, and the presence of Barrett's esophagus after the procedures. However, ARMS demonstrated better outcomes than ARMA in terms of both subjective and objective indicators.

Issue Highlights

Endoscopic management of gastroesophageal reflux disease after sleeve gastrectomy by use of the antireflux mucosectomy procedure.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common disorders in medical practice. It is the most common gastrointestinal diagnosis recorded during visits to outpatient clinics in the United States. Apart from the economic burden of the disease and its impact on quality of life, GERD is the most common predisposing factor for esophageal adenocarcinoma [1]. Recently, many important issues have emerged regarding the classification, pathogenesis, natural history, and treatment of GERD. Although use of proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) is the treatment of choice for GERD, approximately, one-third of patients with GERD fail to response symptomatically to a standard-dose proton-pump inhibitor (PPI), either partially or completely [2]. Additionally, most GERD patients need long-term treatment for frequent relapses after discontinuing acid inhibition therapy. This has led to great interest in new endoscopic therapies for the treatment of this disease. With regard to the diagnosis of GERD, patients with refractory reflux symptoms and normal upper endoscopy are more difficult to diagnose and treat. Combined 24-hour pH and impedance monitoring allows classifying the patients as having true nonerosive reflux disease (NERD), hypersensitive esophagus, or functional heartburn and is helpful for further management of the patients [3]. The main focus of this special issue is on recent advances in the treatment of erosive esophagitis, NERD and Barrett's esophagus. In addition, the emerging diagnostic methods, pharmacological treatments, and endoscopic therapies for GERD are also discussed. The paper entitled “The frequencies of gastroesophageal and extragastroesophageal symptoms in patients with mild erosive esophagitis, severe erosive esophagitis, and Barrett's esophagus, in Taiwan” is the first work simultaneously assessing the differences in reflux symptom profiles among the three different categories of GERD. The data showed that the frequencies of some esophageal and extraesophageal symptoms in patients with Los Angeles grade A/B erosive esophagitis were higher than those in patients with Los Angeles grade C/D erosive esophagitis and Barrett's esophagus. In the paper entitled “Current pharmacological management of gastroesophageal reflux disease,” Y.-K. Wang et al. present the current and developing therapeutic agents for GERD treatment. The efficacies of PPIs and potassium-competitive acid blocker in GERD therapy are well reviewed. Additionally, the article summarizes the development of novel therapeutic agents focusing on the underlying mechanisms of GERD. In the paper entitled “Pharmacological therapy of gastroesophageal reflux in preterm infants,” L. Corvaglia et al. review the pathogenesis, presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux in preterm infants. A stepwise approach is advisable for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux in preterm infants, firstly, promoting nonpharmacological interventions and secondly, limiting drugs to selected infants unresponsive to the conservative measures or who are suffering from severe gastroesophageal reflux with clinical complications. In the paper entitled “Stretta radiofrequency treatment for GERD: a safe and effective modality,” M. Franciosa et al. focus on the safety, efficacy, and durability of the Stretta radiofrequency treatment for GERD therapy. The novel endoscopic treatment reduces esophageal acid exposure, decreases the frequency of transient lower esophageal relaxation, decreases medication use and improves quality of life in GERD patients. In the paper entitled “Duodenal tube feeding: an alternative approach for effectively promoting weight gain in children with gastroesophageal reflux and congenital heart disease,” S. Kuwata et al. showed that duodenal tube feeding improves the weight gain of infants with gastroesophageal reflux who need treatment for congenital-heart-disease-associated heart failure. In the paper entitled “Changes in ghrelin-related factors in gastroesophageal reflux disease in rats,” M. Nahata et al. examined gastrointestinal hormone profiles and functional changes in rats with GERD. The results suggest that aberrantly increased secretion of peripheral ghrelin and decreased ghrelin responsiveness may occur in GERD rats. In the paper entitled “Surgical management of pediatric gastroesophageal reflux disease,” H. T. Jackson and T. D. Kane review the clinical presentation of GERD in pediatric population and discuss the options for surgical management and outcome in these patients. In the paper entitled “Current advances in the diagnosis and treatment of nonerosive reflux disease,” C. L. Chen and P. I. Hsu, review the literature about the pathogenesis, natural history, diagnosis and treatment of NERD. The authors suggest that a combination of 24-hour esophageal impedance and pH monitoring is indicated to differentiate acid-reflux-related NERD, weakly acid reflux-related NERD (hypersensitive esophagus), nonacid-reflux-related NERD, and functional heartburn in patients with poor response to appropriate PPI treatment. In the paper entitled “Antireflux endoluminal therapies: past and present,” K. C. Yew et al. and S.-K. Chuah review, highlight, and discuss three commonly employed antireflux endoluminal procedures: fundoplication or suturing techniques (EndoCinch, NDO, EsophyX), intramural injection or implant techniques (enhancing LES volume and/or strengthening compliance of the LES-EnteryX, Gatekeeper), and radiofrequency ablation of lower esophageal sphincter and cardia (the Stretta system). Ping-I Hsu Nayoung Kim Khean Lee Goh Deng-Chyang Wu

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common diseases seen by gastroenterologists worldwide. A significant proportion of patients have a suboptimal response to acid inhibitors, especially proton pump inhibitors and potassium-competitive acid blockers. Due to concerns regarding the safety of long-term medication, many patients are unwilling to take lifelong medication. Endoscopic antireflux management offers a minimally invasive option for GERD patients. In recent decades, there have been several endoscopic antireflux therapies, including radiofrequency therapy, transoral fundoplication, and mucosal resection or mucosal ablation. Of these, antireflux mucosectomy (ARMS) is an effective and safe therapy for refractory GERD. This review provides an updated summary of antireflux mucosectomy.

Treatment options for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) that is unresponsive to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) remain limited. Therefore, we compared the therapeutic effects of anti-reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) and Stretta radiofrequency (SRF) for intractable GERD in over 400 individuals who underwent either procedure. We conducted a retrospective study between 2016 and 2023 to evaluate the effectiveness of SRF and ARMS treatments for refractory GERD. The primary measure of success was the change in the GERD questionnaire (GERDQ) score. The secondary outcomes were various GERD-related indicators, including endoscopic Los Angeles (LA) classification, Hill's type-based flap valve grade (FVG), EndoFLIP™ distensibility index (DI), rate of PPI discontinuation, resolution rate of Barrett's esophagus, and incidence of adverse events. The ARMS group included patients with high GERDQ scores, FVG, LA grade, and Barrett's esophagus. Both groups had similar rates of improvements in GERDQ score (P = 0.884) and PPI withdrawal (P = 0.866); however, the ARMS group had significantly more side effects and improvements in the median change in GERDQ score (P = 0.011), FVG (P < 0.001), LA grade (P < 0.001), EndoFLIP™ DI (P < 0.001), and resolution of Barrett's esophagus (P < 0.001). The ARMS group had a greater GERDQ score improvement than the SRF group but had symptom relief and PPI discontinuation rates similar to those of the SRF group. However, objective measures, including EndoFLIP™ DI and endoscopic evaluations, were better in the ARMS group than in the SRF group.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common diseases that occurs secondary to failure of the antireflux barrier system, resulting in the frequent and abnormal reflux of gastric contents to the esophagus. GERD is diagnosed in routine clinical practice based on the classic symptoms of heartburn and regurgitation. However, a subset of patients with atypical symptoms can pose challenges in diagnosing GERD. An esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is the most common initial diagnostic test used in the assessment for GERD, although half of these patients will not have any positive endoscopic findings suggestive of GERD. The advanced endoscopic techniques have improved the diagnostic yield of GERD diagnosis and its complications, such as Barrett's esophagus and early esophageal adenocarcinoma. These newer endoscopic tools can better detect subtle irregularities in the mucosa and vascular structures. The management options for GERD include lifestyle modifications, pharmacological therapy, and endoscopic and surgical interventions. The latest addition to the armamentarium is the minimally invasive endoscopic interventions in carefully selected patients, including the electrical stimulation of the LES, Antireflux mucosectomy, Radiofrequency therapy, Transoral Incisionless Fundoplication, Endoscopic Full-Thickness plication (GERDx™), and suturing devices. With the emergence of these advanced endoscopic techniques, it is crucial to understand their selection criteria, advantages, and disadvantages.

878 CLINICAL OUTCOMES OF ENDOSCOPIC ANTI-REFLUX TREATMENT METHODS; ANTI-REFLUX MUCOSECTOMY (ARMS) AND ANTI-REFLUX MUCOSAL ABLATION (ARMA)

The Cure(s) of LOTUS

Transesophageal endoscopic plication (TEP) is a novel endotherapeutic approach in the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This non-randomized prospective study compares TEP with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF). Twenty-four consecutive patients treated with LNF, and 27 managed by TEP were studied. Symptom severity scores, endoscopy, 24 h esophageal pH and esophageal manometry and quality-of-life assessments were obtained pre- and posttreatment. In the LNF group the mean age was 36 yr (17-68) compared with 39 yr (22-62) in the TEP group. Symptom scoring, acid regurgitation score, reduction in the requirements of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), and quality of life remained significantly improved in both groups at a median of 1 yr [10-18 months] follow-up post procedure. However, the improvement was significantly better in symptom score (p= 0.0383) and the control of acid reflux in the LNF group (p= 0.0007). Post-procedure dysphagia was more common in the LNF group. Both techniques improved symptom score, acid regurgitation, quality of life, and reduced the requirements for PPIs. The control of heartburn and acid reflux was better for LNF. TEP, like LNF, is a safe and effective method of management of symptomatic GERD but further developments are necessary to ensure control of esophageal acid reflux.

Background:Endoscopic 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.Methods:The 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.Results:Fifteen 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.Conclusions:The 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.

BackgroundCurrently, antireflux mucosectomy (ARMS) and Stretta radiofrequency (SRF) are the most commonly used minimally invasive antireflux therapies. To date, there have not been any reports comparing ARMS and SRF. Our aim was to compare the clinical efficacies of these two therapeutic methods.MethodsWe analyzed data from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients, including 39 who received ARMS treatment and 30 who received SRF treatment between January 2020 and May 2021. Symptom control, gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire (GERDQ) score, gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) score, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) withdrawal, and PPI reduction were analyzed and compared.ResultsAfter 6 months of follow-up, the results showed that both therapies were effective in improving symptoms and quality of life. No difference was found between the ARMS group and SRF group in GERDQ score, GERD-HRQL score, PPI withdrawal rate, or PPI reduction rate (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the PPI withdrawal rate between the two therapies among patients with gastroesophageal flap valve (GEFV) grade II and grade III (P>0.05), but the PPI withdrawal rate in the ARMS group was significantly higher than that in the SRF group among patients with GEFV grade IV (P<0.05).ConclusionsThe clinical efficacies of ARMS and SRF 6 months postoperation were equivalent. The results showed that both ARMS and SRF treatment were acceptable for patients with GEFV grades II and III, while ARMS should be selected for patients with GEFV grade IV.

Introduction: Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) is a common gastrointestinal disease affecting 3-7% of Asians and becoming a major health care burden in elderly population. Surgical intervention with laparoscopic fundoplication is the effective tool in the management of GERD. Aim: To evaluate the role and advantages of laparoscopic fundoplication in the management of cases with GERD and to compare the laparoscopic Nissen’s fundoplication and laparoscopic toupet’s fundoplication in management of GERD. Materials and Methods: The present retrospective and prospective study was conducted in the Department of General surgery at Government Medical College, Nizamabad from August 2019 to July 2021. A total of 36 cases of both sexes, clinically diagnosed as chronic GERD undergone laparoscopic Nissen’s fundoplication and laparoscopic toupet’s fundoplication surgery were recruited. Preoperative and postoperative assessment of disease status was done at the end of third month and sixth month. Collected data was analysed by using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16.0. The chi- square test was used to test the significance of qualitative data. The p&lt;0.005 was considered as statistically significant. Results: In total data collected for 36 cases, majority cases were between 31-40 years (n=13) and 41-50 years (n=11). Total of 19 patients had undergone Laparoscopic Nissen's Fundoplication while 17 patients were of Laparoscopic Toupet's Fundoplication surgery. The mean difference of age was statistically not significant (p&gt;0.05). Postsurgical significant improvement was observed in cases of grade 3 (n=7), grade 4 (n=19) and grade 5 (n=10) oesophagitis. The mean duration to start oral liquids was 1.29 days and 1.08 days, mean duration of surgery was 3.62 hours and 3.19 hours, mean duration of hospital stay was 4.12 and 3.67 days and the average ambulatory period was 1.46 and 1.62 days in laparoscopic nissen’s group and laparoscopic toupet’s group, respectively. Conclusion: The laparoscopic toupet’s fundoplication and laparoscopic nissen’s fundoplication were comparable in the management of postoperative Complications. The incidence of postoperative dysphagia was comparatively more in laparoscopic Nissen’s group than laparoscopic toupet’s group. However, the incidence was diminished within six months of postoperative follow-up.

Long-term cost-effectiveness of medical, endoscopic and surgical management of gastroesophageal reflux disease