4.6 Article

Two-year results of a feasibility study on antireflux transoral incisionless fundoplication using EsophyX

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-009-0384-8

关键词

Antireflux barrier; Diet; Gastroesophageal reflux disease; Heartburn; Hiatal hernia; Lifestyle

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A feasibility study (n = 19) evaluated the safety and initial efficacy of transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) for the treatment of gastroesophageal disease (GERD). The results at 1 year (n = 17) indicated that TIF was safe and had a significant effect on reducing GERD symptoms, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) usage, acid exposure, and small hiatal hernia. This study was designed to evaluate the long-term safety and durability of TIF. Fourteen patients (50% female; median age, 34 years) completed the 2-year follow-up assessment tests. Three patients were excluded from the study after 1 year because two of them underwent retreatment and one was lost to follow-up. At 2 years, no adverse events related to TIF were reported. A a parts per thousand yen50% improvement in GERD-HRQL scores compared with those at baseline on PPIs was sustained by 64% of patients. TIF was effective in eliminating heartburn in 93% of patients and daily PPI therapy in 71% of patients. Significantly (p < 0.05) more patients were able to consume reflux-causing foods and maintain lifestyle activities without GERD symptoms compared with baseline on PPIs. Fundoplications were durable and maintained their geometric dimensions. TIF was effective in eliminating hiatal hernia in 60% of patients and esophagitis in 55% of patients. Global assessment of all outcomes in each patient revealed that 79% of patients experienced complete cure (29%) or remission (50%) of GERD at 2 years after TIF. The results at 2 years supported the long-term safety and durability of TIF and its sustained effect on the elimination of heartburn, esophagitis, a parts per thousand currency sign2 cm hiatal hernia, and daily dependence on PPIs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据