ReviewSurgical endoscopy2025
The failure pattern for the magnetic sphincter augmentation device: a single-institution case series with literature review.
Review in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- No added risk: national outcomes of magnetic sphincter explant with hiatal hernia repair and fundoplication.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of RefluxStop for gastroesophageal reflux disease: analysis from an Italian healthcare perspective.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMagnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is an effective surgical treatment for GERD. Removal rates are reported around 4-6%, with dysphagia being the most common indication for removal. This rate has increased over time, and the pattern of device failure has not been well established. This study characterizes a consistent pattern of MSA slippage or migration and contextualizes this within the existing literature on MSA failure.
methodsThis is a single-institution retrospective review of patients who underwent MSA placement and device removal between 2014 and 2024. Radiographic and endoscopic images and operative reports were reviewed for the presence of pre-operative and post-operative hiatal hernia or device malposition. We also conducted a comprehensive review of existing literature on MSA explantation, with particular attention to device slippage, malposition, and hiatal hernia.
results42 patients underwent MSA placement at our tertiary academic institution. Twelve of these, plus one patient who had MSA placed elsewhere, underwent device removal for symptoms of dysphagia and/or recurrent reflux (28%) with a median follow-up of 41.1 months. Ten of these 13 patients showed evidence of MSA slippage and/or hiatal hernia. In comparison, our literature review revealed explant rates of 0-12.6% (median 4.7%) with overall shorter terms of follow-up. Similarly, the most common reason for explantation was dysphagia, followed by recurrent or persistent reflux. However, device migration/hiatal herniation was a rare finding.
conclusionIn the long-term follow-up of MSA patients with dysphagia or recurrent reflux, we observe a pattern of device slippage or migration. This pattern mirrors the failure pattern of the 360-degree fundoplication. We suspect an under-appreciation of device slippage or migration as the etiology for these symptoms. While MSA is effective, continued improvements on implantation technique, coupled with careful patient selection and lifestyle counseling, may increase its long-term success rate.
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.