ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Medium-term outcomes after magnetic sphincter augmentation vs. fundoplication for reflux disease due to hiatal hernia: a propensity-score matched comparison in 282 patients.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The failure pattern for the magnetic sphincter augmentation device: a single-institution case series with literature review.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn increasing number of reflux patients opt for magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) instead of fundoplication. However, few studies compare the medium-term efficacy and safety of the procedures.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective single-center analysis of consecutive MSA and Nissen fundoplication cases between 01/2015 and 06/2020. Patients underwent surgery, including hiatoplasty, for medical treatment-resistant reflux due to hiatal hernia. Surgical revision and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) reuptake rates were the primary outcomes. We also compared adverse event rates. Patients with severe preoperative dysphagia/motility disorders were assigned different treatment pathways and excluded from the analysis. We used propensity-score matching to reduce confounding between treatments.
resultsOut of 411 eligible patients, 141 patients who underwent MSA and 141 with fundoplication had similar propensity scores and were analyzed. On average, patients were 55 ± 12 years old and overweight (BMI: 28 ± 5). At 3.9 years of mean follow-up, MSA was associated with lower surgical revision risk as compared to fundoplication (1.2% vs 3.0% per year, respectively; HR: 0.38; 95% CI 0.15-0.96; p = 0.04), and similar PPI-reuptake risk (2.6% vs 4.2% per year; HR: 0.59; 95% CI 0.30-1.16; p = 0.12). Adverse event rates during primary stay were similar (MSA vs. fundoplication: 1% vs. 3%, p = 0.68). Fewer patients experienced adverse events in the MSA group after discharge (24% vs. 33%, p = 0.11), driven by higher rates of self-limiting dysphagia (1% vs. 9%, p < 0.01) and gas/bloating (10% vs. 18%, p = 0.06) after fundoplication. Differences between MSA and fundoplication in dysphagia requiring diagnostic endoscopy (11% vs. 8%, p = 0.54) or surgical revision (2% vs. 1%, p = 1.0) were non-significant. The device explantation rate was 4% (5/141).
conclusionMSA reduces the re-operation risk compared to fundoplication and may decrease adverse event rates after discharge. Randomized head-to-head studies between available surgical options are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39014181What 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.