SynthesisInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2024
Magnetic sphincter augmentation in the management of gastro-esophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reflections on surgery for hiatal hernia.Updates in surgery · 2026Review
- Magnetic sphincter augmentation versus fundoplication for GERD: a systematic review and meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- A Historical and Scientific Review of Anti-Reflux Surgery: Evolution, Evidence, and Future Directions.Current gastroenterology reports · 2026Review
- Review
- More than a mechanical problem: Dysphagia and new-onset ineffective esophageal motility after LINX® placement-a case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Article
- A comparative study of magnetic sphincter augmentation and Nissen fundoplication in the management of GERD. Author's reply.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMagnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) through placement of the LINX device is an alternative to fundoplication in the management of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess efficacy, quality of life, and safety in patients that underwent MSA, with a comparison to fundoplication.
methodsA literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases was performed for studies that reported data on outcomes of MSA, with or without a comparison group undergoing fundoplication, for GERD from January 2000 to January 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effect models and between-study heterogeneity was assessed.
resultsThirty-nine studies with 8075 patients were included: 6983 patients underwent MSA and 1092 patients had laparoscopic fundoplication procedure. Ten of these studies (seven retrospective and three prospective) directly compared MSA with fundoplication. A higher proportion of individuals successfully discontinued proton-pump inhibitors ( P <0.001; WMD 0.83; 95% CI: 0.72-0.93; I2 =96.8%) and had higher patient satisfaction ( P <0.001; WMD 0.85; 95% CI: 0.78-0.93; I2 =85.2%) following MSA when compared to fundoplication. Functional outcomes were better after MSA than after fundoplication including ability to belch ( P <0.001; WMD 0.96; 95% CI: 0.93-0.98; I2 =67.8) and emesis ( P <0.001; WMD 0.92; 95% CI: 0.89-0.95; I2 =42.8%), and bloating ( P =0.003; WMD 0.20; 95% CI: 0.07-0.33; I2 =97.0%). MSA had higher rates of dysphagia ( P =0.001; WMD 0.41; 95% CI: 0.17-0.65; I2 =97.3%) when compared to fundoplication. The overall erosion and removal rate following MSA was 0.24% and 3.9%, respectively, with no difference in surgical reintervention rates between MSA and fundoplication ( P =0.446; WMD 0.001; 95% CI: -0.001-0.002; I2 =78.5%).
conclusionsMSA is a safe and effective procedure at reducing symptom burden of GERD and can potentially improve patient satisfaction and functional outcomes. However, randomized controlled trials directly comparing MSA with fundoplication are necessary to determine where MSA precisely fits in the management pathway of GERD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.