Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35129522›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgery2023

The Impact of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation (MSA) on Esophagogastric Junction (EGJ) and Esophageal Body Physiology and Manometric Characteristics.

Shahin Ayazi, Katrin Schwameis, Ping Zheng, Kirsten Newhams, Brittney M Myers, Andrew D Grubic, Toshitaka Hoppo, Blair A Jobe

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. The role of magnetic sphincter augmentation in the gastroesophageal reflux disease treatment pathway: the gastroenterology perspective.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shahin AyaziEsophageal Institute, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
Katrin SchwameisEsophageal Institute, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
Ping ZhengEsophageal Institute, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
Kirsten NewhamsEsophageal Institute, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
Brittney M MyersEsophageal Institute, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
Andrew D GrubicEsophageal Institute, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
Toshitaka HoppoEsophageal Institute, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
Blair A JobeEsophageal Institute, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
Allegheny Health Network · USDrexel University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the impact of MSA on lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and esophageal body using high resolution impedance manometry.

backgroundMSA is an effective treatment in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease, but there is limited data on its impact on esophageal functional physiology.

methodsPatients who underwent MSA were approached 1-year after surgery for objective foregut testing consists of upper endoscopy, esophagram, high resolution impedance manometry, and esophageal pH-monitoring. Postoperative data were then compared to the preoperative measurements.

resultsA total of 100 patients were included in this study. At a mean follow up of 14.9(10.1) months, 72% had normalization of esophageal acid exposure. MSA resulted in an increase in mean LES resting pressure [29.3(12.9) vs 25(12.3), P < 0.001]. This was also true for LES overall length [2.9(0.6) vs 2.6(0.6), P = 0.02] and intra-abdominal length [1.2(0.7) vs 0.8(0.8), P < 0.001]. Outflow resistance at the EGJ increased after MSA as demonstrated by elevation in intrabolus pressure (19.6 vs 13.5 mmHg, P < 0.001) and integrated relaxation pressure (13.5 vs 7.2, P < 0.001). MSA was also associated with an increase in distal esophageal body contraction amplitude [103.8(45.4) vs 94.1(39.1), P = 0.015] and distal contractile integral [2647.1(2064.4) vs 2099.7(1656.1), P < 0.001]. The percent peristalsis and incomplete bolus clearance remained unchanged ( P = 0.47 and 0.08, respectively).

conclusionsMSA results in improvement in the LES manometric characteristics. Although the device results in an increased outflow resistance at the EGJ, the compensatory increase in the force of esophageal contraction will result in unaltered esophageal peristaltic progression and bolus clearance.

Indexed as

Body FluidsGastroesophageal RefluxElectric ImpedanceEsophageal pH MonitoringEsophagogastric JunctionHumans

Identifiers

PMID35129522
PMCPMC9891265
OpenAlexW3205546113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.