Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 30, Issue 9, pp 3684–3690 | Cite as

Revaluation of the efficacy of magnetic sphincter augmentation for treating gastroesophageal reflux disease

  • Hongke Zhang
  • Dinghui Dong
  • Zhengwen Liu
  • Shuixiang He
  • Liangshuo Hu
  • Yi LvEmail author



Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a prevalent disease which severely impacts the quality of life of the patients. The surgical options are limited to such patients who are not satisfied with medical therapies. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is a new antireflux surgical technique for treating GERD, which could physiologically reinforce the lower esophageal sphincter by magnetic force. Many clinical and animal studies have focused on this new therapy. The purpose of this work was to review the feasibility, efficacy and safety of MSA as a new treatment for GERD.


We performed a PubMed database search for the MSA and GERD-related studies between 2008 and September 22, 2015. One animal study, two case reports and fifteen clinical studies were identified in this review.


The MSA device reinforces the lower esophageal sphincter to antireflux via magnetic force. The feasibility of this laparoscopic technique has been proved by the experimental and clinical studies. The clinical studies demonstrate that MSA treatment could effectively reduce the percent time of esophageal acid exposure (pH < 4) and improve the GERD health-related quality of life score. The operation time of MSA is shorter than that of the Nissen fundoplication, and the efficacy of MSA treatment is equal to that of fundoplication. The most frequent postoperative complication is dysphagia, and the majority of them could be self-resolved with conservative treatment.


MSA (or LINX) devices provide an alternative surgical option for the patients who had failed in medical therapy. This review of the current literatures demonstrates that MSA is as effective as the medical and conventional surgical therapies. In the future, MSA will play a more important role in the treatment of GERD because of its unique advantage.


Magnetic sphincter augmentation Gastroesophageal reflux disease Feasibility Efficacy Side effects 



This work was supported by the Special Fund for Basic Research on Scientific Instruments of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 81127005/H0322).

Compliance with ethical standards


Dr. Lv received grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China, during the conduct of this work. Hongke Zhang, Dinghui Dong, Zhengwen Liu, Shuixiang He and Liangshuo Hu have no conflicts of interest to disclose.


  1. 1.
    Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, Dent J, Jones R, Global Consensus G (2006) The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol 101:1900–1920CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vakil N (2010) Disease definition, clinical manifestations, epidemiology and natural history of GERD. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 24:759–764CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Castell DO, Kahrilas PJ, Richter JE, Vakil NB, Johnson DA, Zuckerman S, Skammer W, Levine JG (2002) Esomeprazole (40 mg) compared with lansoprazole (30 mg) in the treatment of erosive esophagitis. Am J Gastroenterol 97:575–583CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schmitt C, Lightdale CJ, Hwang C, Hamelin B (2006) A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, 8-week comparative trial of standard doses of esomeprazole (40 mg) and omeprazole (20 mg) for the treatment of erosive esophagitis. Dig Dis Sci 51:844–850CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ganz RA, Gostout CJ, Grudem J, Swanson W, Berg T, DeMeester TR (2008) Use of a magnetic sphincter for the treatment of GERD: a feasibility study. Gastrointest Endosc 67:287–294CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bredenoord AJ, Pandolfino JE, Smout AJ (2013) Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Lancet 381:1933–1942CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bonavina L, Saino GI, Bona D, Lipham J, Ganz RA, Dunn D, DeMeester T (2008) Magnetic augmentation of the lower esophageal sphincter: results of a feasibility clinical trial. J Gastrointest Surg 12:2133–2140CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bonavina L, DeMeester T, Fockens P, Dunn D, Saino G, Bona D, Lipham J, Bemelman W, Ganz RA (2010) Laparoscopic sphincter augmentation device eliminates reflux symptoms and normalizes esophageal acid exposure: one- and 2-year results of a feasibility trial. Ann Surg 252:857–862CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lipham JC, DeMeester TR, Ganz RA, Bonavina L, Saino G, Dunn DH, Fockens P, Bemelman W (2012) The LINX(R) reflux management system: confirmed safety and efficacy now at 4 years. Surg Endosc 26:2944–2949CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bonavina L, Saino G, Bona D, Sironi A, Lazzari V (2013) 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 217:577–585CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ganz RA, Peters JH, Horgan S, Bemelman WA, Dunst CM, Edmundowicz SA, Lipham JC, Luketich JD, Melvin WS, Oelschlager BK, Schlack-Haerer SC, Smith CD, Smith CC, Dunn D, Taiganides PA (2013) Esophageal sphincter device for gastroesophageal reflux disease. N Engl J Med 368:719–727CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Loh Y, McGlone ER, Reddy M, Khan OA (2014) Is the LINX reflux management system an effective treatment for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease? Int J Surg 12:994–997CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Reynolds JL, Zehetner J, Bildzukewicz N, Katkhouda N, Dandekar G, Lipham JC (2014) Magnetic sphincter augmentation with the LINX device for gastroesophageal reflux disease after US Food and Drug Administration approval. Am Surg 80:1034–1038PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ganz RA (2015) Long-Term Outcomes of Patients Receiving a Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation Device for Gastroesophageal Reflux. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol.
  15. 15.
    Desart K, Rossidis G, Michel M, Lux T, Ben-David K (2015) Gastroesophageal reflux management with the LINX® system for gastroesophageal reflux disease following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 19(10):1782–1786CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sheu EG, Nau P, Nath B, Kuo B, Rattner DW (2015) A comparative trial of laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation and Nissen fundoplication. Surg Endosc 29:505–509CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reynolds JL, Zehetner J, Wu P, Shah S, Bildzukewicz N, Lipham JC (2015) Laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation vs laparoscopic nissen fundoplication: a matched-pair analysis of 100 patients. J Am Coll Surg 221:123–128CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Riegler M, Schoppman SF, Bonavina L, Ashton D, Horbach T, Kemen M (2015) Magnetic sphincter augmentation and fundoplication for GERD in clinical practice: one-year results of a multicenter, prospective observational study. Surg Endosc 29:1123–1129CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lipham JC, Taiganides PA, Louie BE, Ganz RA, DeMeester TR (2015) Safety analysis of first 1000 patients treated with magnetic sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dis Esophagus 28:305–311CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bauer M, Meining A, Kranzfelder M, Jell A, Schirren R, Wilhelm D, Friess H, Feussner H (2015) Endoluminal perforation of a magnetic antireflux device. Surg Endosc 29:3806–3810CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stadlhuber RJ, Dubecz A, Meining A, Stein HJ (2015) Adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus in a patient with a magnetic sphincter augmentation device: first of many to come? Ann Thorac Surg 99:e147–e148CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Harnsberger CR, Broderick RC, Fuchs HF, Berducci M, Beck C, Gallo A, Jacobsen GR, Sandler BJ, Horgan S (2015) Magnetic lower esophageal sphincter augmentation device removal. Surg Endosc 29:984–986CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Smith CD, DeVault KR, Buchanan M (2014) Introduction of mechanical sphincter augmentation for gastroesophageal reflux disease into practice: early clinical outcomes and keys to successful adoption. J Am Coll Surg 218:776–781 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Louie BE, Farivar AS, Shultz D, Brennan C, Vallieres E, Aye RW (2014) Short-term outcomes using magnetic sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for medically resistant gastroesophageal reflux disease. The Ann Thorac Surg 98:498–504; discussion 504-495CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schwameis K, Schwameis M, Zorner B, Lenglinger J, Asari R, Riegler FM, Schoppmann SF (2014) Modern GERD treatment: feasibility of minimally invasive esophageal sphincter augmentation. Anticancer Res 34:2341–2348PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hongke Zhang
    • 1
  • Dinghui Dong
    • 1
  • Zhengwen Liu
    • 2
  • Shuixiang He
    • 3
  • Liangshuo Hu
    • 1
  • Yi Lv
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, First Affiliated HospitalXi’an Jiaotong UniversityXi’anPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Research Institute of Advanced Surgical Techniques and EngineeringXi’an Jiaotong UniversityXi’anPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Department of Gastroenterology, First Affiliated HospitalXi’an Jiaotong UniversityXi’anPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations