Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23073680›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2013

Electrical stimulation therapy of the lower esophageal sphincter is successful in treating GERD: final results of open-label prospective trial.

Leonardo Rodríguez, Patricia Rodriguez, Beatriz Gómez, Juan C Ayala, Jorge Saba, Alberto Perez-Castilla, Manoel Galvao Neto, Michael D Crowell

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02441400 (EndoStim Patient Registry-LES Stimulation System for the Treatment of GERD), which is not on this map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02441400 terminatednot on this map

EndoStim Patient Registry-LES Stimulation System for the Treatment of GERD

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorEndoStim Inc.Ran2013 to 2022Enrolled350ConditionsGERDArmsEndoStim LES Stimulation System
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Neuromodulation for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review.Journal of translational gastroenterology · 2023
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Gastroparesis in the 2020s: New Treatments, New Paradigms.Current gastroenterology reports · 2020
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease.Gastroenterology report · 2015
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Electrical stimulation therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2014
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Leonardo RodríguezDepartment of Surgery, Centro Clínico de Obesidad (CCO), Obesidad Y Diabetes, Estoril N° 120 Of. 814, Las Condes, Santiago, Chile. doctor@leonardorodriguez.cl
Patricia Rodriguez
Beatriz Gómez
Juan C Ayala
Jorge Saba
Alberto Perez-Castilla
Manoel Galvao Neto
Michael D Crowell
Clínica Las Condes · CLGastro Obeso Center · BRMayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) improves LES pressure without interfering with LES relaxation. The aim of this open-label pilot trial was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of long-term LES stimulation using a permanently implanted LES stimulator in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

methodsGERD patients who were at least partially responsive to proton pump inhibitors (PPI) with abnormal esophageal pH, hiatal hernia ≤ 3 cm, and esophagitis ≤ LA grade C were included. Bipolar stitch electrodes were placed in the LES and an IPG was placed in a subcutaneous pocket. Electrical stimulation was delivered at 20 Hz, 215 μs, 3-8 mA in 30 min sessions. The number and timing of sessions was tailored to each patient's GERD profile. Patients were evaluated using GERD-HRQL, daily symptom and medication diaries, SF-12, esophageal pH, and high-resolution manometry.

results24 patients (mean age = 53 years, SD = 12 years; 14 men) were implanted; 23 completed their 6-month evaluation. Median GERD-HRQL scores at 6 months was 2.0 (IQR = 0-5.5) and was significantly better than both baseline on-PPI [9.0 (range = 6.0-10.0); p < 0.001] and off-PPI [23 (21-25); p < 0.001] GERD-HRQL. Median% 24-h esophageal pH < 4.0 at baseline was 10.1 and improved to 5.1 at 6 months (p < 0.001). At their 6-month follow-up, 91 % (21/23) of the patients were off PPI and had significantly better median GERD-HRQL on LES stimulation compared to their on-PPI GERD-HRQL at baseline (9.0 vs. 2.0; p < 0.001). There were no unanticipated implantation- or stimulation-related adverse events or untoward sensation due to stimulation. There were no reports of treatment-related dysphagia, and manometric swallow was also unaffected.

conclusionsElectrical stimulation of the LES is safe and effective for treating GERD. There is a significant and sustained improvement in GERD symptoms, esophageal pH, and reduction in PPI usage without any side effects with the therapy. Furthermore, the therapy can be optimized to address an individual patient's disease.

Indexed as

Electric Stimulation TherapyEsophageal Sphincter, LowerImplantable NeurostimulatorsFemaleGastroesophageal RefluxHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsProspective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID23073680
PMCPMC3599161
OpenAlexW2046995336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.