Innovative Techniken in der Refluxchirurgie

Johannes Heimbucher

doi:10.1055/a-0862-0951

Zentralblatt für Chirurgie - Zeitschrift für Allgemeine, Viszeral-, Thorax- und Gefäßchirurgie, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Zentralbl Chir 2019; 144(02): 171-178
DOI: 10.1055/a-0862-0951

Übersicht

Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Innovative Techniken in der Refluxchirurgie

State of the ArtInnovative Techniques in Reflux SurgeryState of the Art

Johannes Heimbucher

Chirurgische Abteilung, Marienkrankenhaus Kassel, Deutschland

› Institutsangaben

Abstract

Zusammenfassung

Potenzielle unerwünschte Wirkungen der PPI-Therapie (PPI: Protonenpumpeninhibitor) wie auch nicht immer zufriedenstellende Ergebnisse der etablierten Operationsmethoden führen aktuell zu steigendem Interesse an neuen chirurgischen Therapieverfahren zur Refluxtherapie. Die Technik und Ergebnisse der magnetischen Verstärkung (LINX^®) und der elektrischen Stimulation (EndoStim^®) des unteren ösophagealen Sphinkters werden dargestellt und diskutiert. Beide Verfahren sind wenig invasiv, prinzipiell reversibel und mit ermutigenden mittelfristigen Ergebnissen verbunden. Es wird damit eine erweiterte Indikation zur chirurgischen Therapie der gastroösophagealen Refluxkrankheit (GERD) angenommen. Dies birgt jedoch in Kombination mit der technischen Einfachheit der Verfahren das Risiko inadäquater Indikationen. Zur Gewinnung belastbarer Langzeitergebnisse wird die Etablierung eines verpflichtenden Registers vorgeschlagen.

Abstract

There is renewed interested in novel surgical procedures for GERD, as there are potential undesirable effects of PPI therapy and the results of the current surgical methods are not always satisfactory. The technique and results of magnetic enhancement (LINX^®) and electrical stimulation (EndoStim^®) of the lower oesophageal sphincter are presented and discussed. Both methods are less invasive, principally reversible and associated with encouraging mid-term results. It may therefore be an extended indication for the surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. However, this, in combination with the technical simplicity of the procedures, carries the risk of inadequate indications. In order to obtain reliable long-term results, the establishment of a mandatory register is proposed.

Schlüsselwörter

GERD - Refluxchirurgie - LINX - EndoStim - Neurostimulator

Key words

GERD - reflux surgery - LINX - EndoStim - neurostimulator

Volltext

Referenzen

Literatur
1 von Rahden BH, Scheurlen M, Filser J. et al. [Newly recognized side-effects of proton pump inhibitors. Arguments in favour of fundoplication for GERD?]. Chirurg 2012; 83: 38-44
2 Laienmedien (letzter Zugriff 05.02.2019):. http://www.spiegel.de/plus/aerzte-verordnen-viel-zu-oft-magensaeureblocker-a-a2f0ed11-55ad-4128-97bb-e499f47222b2 https://www.sueddeutsche.de/news/wissen/wissenschaft-magensaeureblocker-in-massen-verschrieben-dpa.urn-newsml-dpa-com-20090101-170123-99-992873 https://www.stern.de/gesundheit/magensaeureblocker–mittel-gegen-sodbrennen-bergen-risiken-7294904.html http://www.reflux-behandlung.de/endostim-therapie/ https://www.tvmainfranken.de/mediathek/video/gesund-und-fit-endostim/ http://www.refluxmedical.com/de/magnetischer-ring-linx/ http://www.refluxmedical.com/de/buch-nie-wieder-sodbrennen/ https://www.klinikum-stuttgart.de/kliniken-institute-zentren/refluxzentrum/diagnostik-und-therapie/therapie/operativ/endostim-videos/ https://www.artemed.de/ckms/de/fachbereiche/bauchzentrum/refluxmunich.html
3 Galmiche JP, Zerbib F, des Varannes SB. Treatment of GORD: three decades of progress and disappointments. United European Gastroenterol J 2013; 1: 140-150
4 Subramanian C. Triadafilopoulos G · Refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf) 2015; 3: 41-53
5 Dent J. Barrettʼs esophagus: a historical perspective, an update on core practicalities and predictions on future evolutions of management. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 26 (Suppl. 01) S11-S30
6 Labenz J, Chandrasoma PT, Knapp LJ. et al. Proposed approach to the challenging management of progressive gastroesophageal reflux disease. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 10: 175-183
7 DeMeester TR, Bonavina L, Abertucci M. Nissen fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Evaluation of primary repair in 100 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 1986; 204: 19
8 DeMeester TR, Stein HJ. Minimizing the side effects of antireflux surgery. World J Surg 1992; 16: 3354
9 Fuchs KH. Konventionelle und minimal-invasive chirurgische Therapie der gastroösophagealen Refluxkrankheit. Chirurg 2005; 76: 370-378
10 Leonardi KH, Lee ME, El-Kurd MF. et al. An experimental study of the effectiveness of various antireflux operations. Ann Thorac Surg 1977; 24: 215-222
11 Dickman R, Maradey-Romero C, Gingold-Belfer R. et al. Unmet needs in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2015; 21: 309-319
12 Fuchs KH, Musial F, Ulbricht F. et al. Foregut symptoms, somatoform tendencies, and the selection of patients for antireflux surgery. Dis Esophagus 2017; 30: 1-10
13 Zaninotto G, DeMeester TR, Schwizer W. et al. The lower esophageal sphincter in health and disease. Am J Surg 1988; 155: 104-111
14 Crookes PF. Physiology of reflux disease: role of the lower esophageal sphincter. Surg Endosc 2006; 20 (Suppl. 02) S462-S466
15 Boeckxstaens GE. Review article: the pathophysiology of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007; 26: 149-160
16 Broeders JA, Mauritz FA, Ahmed Ali U. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic Nissen (posterior total) versus Toupet (posterior partial) fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Br J Surg 2010; 97: 1318-1330
17 Feussner H, Wilhelm D. [Antireflux operations: indications and techniques]. Chirurg 2013; 84: 339-350 doi:10.1007/s00104-012-2385-8
18 Angelchik JP, Cohen R. A new surgical procedure for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux and hiatal hernia. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1979; 148: 246-248
19 Patel NM, Feiler EM, Patel KJ. Angelchik antireflux prosthesis–its usefulness and review of literature. Am J Gastroenterol 1984; 79: 12-15
20 Dyer R, Rogers WE, Penn SR. et al. Intra-abdominal migration of the Angelchik antireflux prosthesis. South Med J 1984; 77: 384-386
21 Berguer R, Stiegmann GV, Yamamoto M. et al. Minimal access surgery for gastroesophageal reflux: laparoscopic placement of the Angelchik prosthesis in pigs. Surg Endosc 1991; 5: 123-126
22 Varshney S, Kelly JJ, Branagan G. et al. Angelchik prosthesis revisited. World J Surg 2002; 26: 129-133
23 Kelly JJ, Watson DI, Chin KF. et al. Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication: clinical outcomes at 10 years. J Am Coll Surg 2007; 205: 570-575
24 Fein M, Bueter M, Thalheimer A. et al. Weniger Refluxrezidive nach Nissen-Fundoplikatio. Chirurg 2008; 79: 759-764
25 Finks JF, Wei Y, Birkmeyer JD. The rise and fall of antireflux surgery in the United States. Surg Endosc 2006; 20: 1698-1701
26 Funk LM, Kanji A, Melvin WS. et al. Elective antireflux surgery in the US: an analysis of national trends in utilization and inpatient outcomes from 2005 to 2010. Surg Endosc 2014; 28: 1712-1719
27 Ganz RA, Peters JH, Horgan S. et al. Esophageal sphincter device for gastroesophageal reflux disease. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 719-727
28 Ganz RA. Long-term outcomes of patients receiving a magnetic sphincter augmentation device for gastroesophageal reflux. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14: 671-677
29 Ganz RA. A review of new surgical and endoscopic therapies for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y) 2016; 12: 424-431
30 Stephan D, Attwood S, Labenz J. et al. EndoStim^®-Therapie – eine neue minimal-invasive Technologie in der Antirefluxchirurgie. Chirurg 2018; 89: 785-792
31 Bonavina L, Saino G, Bona D. et al. One hundred consecutive patients treated with magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease: 6 years of clinical experience from a single center. J Am Coll Surg 2013; 217: 577-585
32 Schwameis K, Schwameis M, Zörner B. et al. Modern GERD treatment: feasibility of minimally invasive esophageal sphincter augmentation. Anticancer Res 2014; 34: 2341-2348
33 Lipham JC, Taiganides PA, Louie BE. et al. Safety analysis of first 1000 patients treated with magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dis Esophagus 2015; 28: 305-311
34 Asti E, Aiolfi A, Lazzari V. et al. Magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease: review of clinical studies. Updates Surg 2018; 70: 323-330
35 Bonavina L, DeMeester T, Fockens P. et al. Laparoscopic sphincter augmentation device eliminates reflux symptoms and normalizes esophageal acid exposure: one- and 2-year results of a feasibility trial. Ann Surg 2010; 252: 857-862
36 Smith CD, Ganz RA, Lipham JC. et al. Lower esophageal sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease: the safety of a modern implant. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2017; 27: 586-591
37 Harnsberger CR, Broderick RC, Fuchs HF. et al. Magnetic lower esophageal sphincter augmentation device removal. Surg Endosc 2015; 29: 984-986
38 Tatum JM, Alicuben E, Bildzukewicz N. et al. Removing the magnetic sphincter augmentation device: operative management and outcomes. Surg Endosc 2018;
39 Alicuben ET, Bell RCW, Jobe BA. et al. Worldwide experience with erosion of the magnetic sphincter augmentation device. J Gastrointest Surg 2018; 22: 1442-1447
40 Reynolds JL, Zehetner J, Wu P. et al. Laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation vs. laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication: a matched-pair analysis of 100 patients. J Am Coll Surg 2015; 221: 123-128
41 Sheu EG, Nau P, Nath B. et al. A comparative trial of laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation and Nissen fundoplication. Surg Endosc 2015; 29: 505-509
42 Louie BE, Farivar AS, Shultz D. et al. Short-term outcomes using magnetic sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for medically resistant gastroesophageal reflux disease. Ann Thorac Surg 2014; 98: 498-504
43 Warren HF, Brown LM, Mihura M. et al. Factors influencing the outcome of magnetic sphincter augmentation for chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Endosc 2018; 32: 405-412
44 Riegler M, Schoppman SF, Bonavina L. et al. Magnetic sphincter augmentation and fundoplication for GERD in clinical practice: one-year results of a multicenter, prospective observational study. Surg Endosc 2015; 29: 1123-1129
45 Skubleny D, Switzer NJ, Dang J. et al. LINX^® magnetic esophageal sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 2017; 31: 3078-3084
46 Rodríguez L, Rodriguez P, Gómez B. et al. Electrical stimulation therapy of the lower esophageal sphincter is successful in treating GERD: final results of open-label prospective trial. Surg Endosc 2013; 27: 1083-1092
47 Siersema PD, Smout AJ, Conchillo JM. et al. Electrical stimulation therapy (EST) of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) – an effective therapy for refractory GERD – interim results of an international multicenter trial. United European Gastroenterol J 2013; 1 (Suppl. 01) A411
48 Rodríguez L, Rodriguez PA, Gómez B. et al. Electrical stimulation therapy of the lower esophageal sphincter is successful in treating GERD: long-term 3-year results. Surg Endosc 2016; 30: 2666-2672
49 Labenz J. Preliminary results of a prospective multicenter registry of lower esophageal sphincter stimulation for GERD: The LESS-GERD Registry. Gastroenterology 2017; 152: S470
50 Nieponice A, Borbely Y, Rodriguez L. et al. EndoStim^® LES Stimulation therapy improves GERD in patients with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Surg Endosc 2016; 30 (Suppl.) S130
51 Kuckelman JP, Phillips CJ, Derickson MJ. et al. Esophageal magnetic sphincter augmentation as a novel approach to post-bariatric surgery gastroesophageal reflux disease. Obes Surg 2018; 28: 3080-3086
52 Rodriguez L, Rodriguez P, Gómez B. et al. Electrical stimulation therapy (EST) of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) – emerging treatment for preventing GERD in achalasia patients treated with LES myotomy. Emerg Technol Poster. SAGES2012, San Diego