FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2409431058> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2409431058 endingPage "A282" @default.
• W2409431058 startingPage "A282.1" @default.
• W2409431058 abstract "<h3>Introduction</h3> Magnetic bead oesophageal sphincter augmentation device (MSAD) offers an alternative to tissue fundoplication (TF) in the management of gastro oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). This study evaluates patient decision pathways in selecting one of these surgical options and quality of life based outcomes. <h3>Method</h3> Consecutive patients with chronic GORD who underwent surgical intervention for definitive treatment were enrolled in the study. The selection criteria for MSAD procedure included objective evidence of GORD, good oesophageal motility, absence of a large hiatus hernia and long segment Barrett’s oesophagus. Pre-operative symptoms, oesophageal physiology, pre-operative and one year post-operative reflux related quality of life scores (HRQL) and the reason for selection of a surgical technique were obtained from a prospective database. Comparative analysis between the MSAD and the TF group was performed. <h3>Results</h3> A total of 80 patients were included in the study. Forty six patients were suitable for MSAD, of which 44 (96%) elected to undergo the procedure. Thirty four patients failed to meet the inclusion criteria for MSAD and underwent TF, along with 2 patients who preferred to be treated with TF despite suitability for MSAD. Distal oesophageal acid exposure was significantly higher in the TF group (DeMeester score median 52.6 [22–74]) than in the MSAD group (DeMeester score median 34.4 [16–55] (p = 0.011). The HRQL score however were similar for both groups (TF 23.9; MSAD 25.8; p = 0.55). MSAD patients felt the main reason for choosing the procedure was becasue it was less invasive,(30/44, 71%) and secondarily because they perceived it to be associated with less side effects (5/44, 11%). In the TF group 24 patients (64%) felt that the surgeon had influenced their choice of procedure, of which 22 (94%) would have chosen MSAD had they been suitable. Four patients however (11%) chose TF because it was an established procedure with extensive experience. <h3>Conclusion</h3> Suitability for MSAD was found in 57.5% of patients with objective evidence of GORD. The perception that it represents a less invasive, less problematic but definitive procedure, is an attractive option for patients who may not otherwise have considered more radical surgery. There was no clear correlation with the extent of distal oesophageal acid exposure and the impact of this on patient health related quality of life, suggesting that debilitating symptoms can still occur with relatively modest degrees of reflux. The option of MSAD as a sphincter augmentation rather than a gastric reconstruction procedure may broaden the spectrum of patients willing to undergo surgical rather than medical therapy. <h3>Disclosure of interest</h3> None Declared." @default.
• W2409431058 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2409431058 creator A5021755399 @default.
• W2409431058 creator A5024547532 @default.
• W2409431058 creator A5044201710 @default.
• W2409431058 creator A5067085761 @default.
• W2409431058 creator A5076656837 @default.
• W2409431058 creator A5084733725 @default.
• W2409431058 date "2015-06-01" @default.
• W2409431058 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2409431058 title "PWE-158 Magnetic sphincter augmentation broadens the appeal of surgical intervention in chronic reflux sufferers" @default.
• W2409431058 doi "https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2015-309861.606" @default.
• W2409431058 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W2409431058 type Work @default.
• W2409431058 sameAs 2409431058 @default.
• W2409431058 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2409431058 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2409431058 hasAuthorship W2409431058A5021755399 @default.
• W2409431058 hasAuthorship W2409431058A5024547532 @default.
• W2409431058 hasAuthorship W2409431058A5044201710 @default.
• W2409431058 hasAuthorship W2409431058A5067085761 @default.
• W2409431058 hasAuthorship W2409431058A5076656837 @default.
• W2409431058 hasAuthorship W2409431058A5084733725 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConcept C188816634 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConcept C2778197217 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConcept C2779134260 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConcept C2780877482 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConcept C43270747 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConceptScore W2409431058C126322002 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConceptScore W2409431058C141071460 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConceptScore W2409431058C188816634 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConceptScore W2409431058C2778197217 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConceptScore W2409431058C2779134260 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConceptScore W2409431058C2780877482 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConceptScore W2409431058C43270747 @default.
• W2409431058 hasConceptScore W2409431058C71924100 @default.
• W2409431058 hasIssue "Suppl 1" @default.
• W2409431058 hasLocation W24094310581 @default.
• W2409431058 hasOpenAccess W2409431058 @default.
• W2409431058 hasPrimaryLocation W24094310581 @default.
• W2409431058 hasRelatedWork W2001535856 @default.
• W2409431058 hasRelatedWork W2078656923 @default.
• W2409431058 hasRelatedWork W2084474738 @default.
• W2409431058 hasRelatedWork W2169043072 @default.
• W2409431058 hasRelatedWork W2372018813 @default.
• W2409431058 hasRelatedWork W2409073516 @default.
• W2409431058 hasRelatedWork W2473055654 @default.
• W2409431058 hasRelatedWork W2511763529 @default.
• W2409431058 hasRelatedWork W2895983370 @default.
• W2409431058 hasRelatedWork W3017241511 @default.
• W2409431058 hasVolume "64" @default.
• W2409431058 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2409431058 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2409431058 magId "2409431058" @default.
• W2409431058 workType "article" @default.