ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
No added risk: national outcomes of magnetic sphincter explant with hiatal hernia repair and fundoplication.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMagnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is a ring of titanium beads that is implanted around the gastroesophageal junction for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease, providing an alternative to traditional fundoplication. Despite positive outcomes, a subset of patients require device explantation. The safety of patients undergoing explant with revisional surgery remains limited to single-institution experiences. The objective of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes between patients undergoing MSA device explant with revisional surgery and those undergoing primary surgery using a national database.
methodsThe 2017-2023 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry was queried for patients undergoing MSA removal with concurrent hiatal hernia repair and fundoplication. These patients were compared to a cohort undergoing primary hiatal hernia repair with fundoplication. Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:1 fashion based on baseline demographics, comorbidities, and procedure type to minimize selection bias. Outcomes of interest included operative time, length of stay, thirty-day postoperative complications, readmissions, and mortality.
resultsA total of 49,535 patients underwent foregut surgery during the study period, of whom 40 (0.01%) underwent MSA device explant with revisional surgery. Following propensity score matching, each cohort included 40 patients. Overall demographics between the MSA and primary hernia repair groups were similar with the majority being female (87.5%), mean ages of 58.3 and 58.8 years, and BMI of 29.1 and 28.9 kg/m
conclusionsThis study represents the largest national analysis of patients undergoing MSA device explant with concurrent revisional foregut surgery. Findings suggest that MSA device removal with hiatal hernia repair and fundoplication is safe, with perioperative outcomes equivalent to those of primary foregut surgery.
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.