Innovative Techniken in der Refluxchirurgie

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

• 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