Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
100 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2008-11-30
2011-09-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
An Observational Clinical Feasibility Study of the Magnetic Esophageal Sphincter
NCT01058070
A Post-Approval Study of the LINX® Reflux Management System
NCT01940185
Observational Study of Anti-Reflux Surgery
NCT01624506
Evaluation of Safety and Effectiveness of the RefluxStop Device in the Management of GERD
NCT02759094
RELIEF Europe Study
NCT02762487
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The intent of the LINX System is to allow a surgeon, using existing laparoscopic techniques and instruments, to augment a weak LES and restore the defective barrier at the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). This defect of the GEJ is the source of abnormal reflux. The LINX device is an expandable string of individual titanium beads with magnetic cores. The device is laparoscopically placed as a ring around the lower esophageal sphincter. The magnetic attraction of the beads augments the esophageal sphincter's ability to resist gastric pressures that cause reflux. At rest, the LINX device encircles the sphincter with each bead resting against an adjacent bead, to avoid compression of the tubular esophagus. When swallowing, higher pressures are created, allowing the magnetic bond between beads to break, and the LINX implant to expand radially. This serves to preserve swallow and other physiologic functions, such as belching and vomiting, and avoids the side effect of post-prandial bloating. The device can be placed with minimal dissection, preserving anatomy, and is also removable, if necessary. This provides important benefits as it preserves the native anatomy, unlike the Nissen procedure.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
NA
SINGLE_GROUP
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation
Single-arm study: all subjects were treated with magnetic sphincter augmentation. A subject's baseline measurements prior to sphincter augmentation were compared to post-sphincter augmentation measurements. Subjects served as their own control.
Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation
The area of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) is accessed using a standard laparoscopic approach. The tubular esophagus, in the area of the LES, is sized and the appropriately sized sphincter augmentation device is placed circumferentially around the esophagus in the area of the LES. After confirming proper placement, the ends of the device are secured. At this point, the implant procedure is complete, laparoscopic instruments are withdrawn and access points are closed.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation
The area of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) is accessed using a standard laparoscopic approach. The tubular esophagus, in the area of the LES, is sized and the appropriately sized sphincter augmentation device is placed circumferentially around the esophagus in the area of the LES. After confirming proper placement, the ends of the device are secured. At this point, the implant procedure is complete, laparoscopic instruments are withdrawn and access points are closed.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Subject is a suitable surgical candidate, i.e. is able to undergo general anesthesia and laparoscopic surgery
* Documented typical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) for longer than 6 months (regurgitation or heartburn which is defined as a burning epigastic or substernal pain which responds to acid neutralization or suppression)
* Patient requires daily proton pump inhibitor or other anti-reflux drug therapy
* Total Distal Ambulatory Esophageal pH must meet the following criteria: pH\< 4 for ≥ 4.5% of the time Note: Subjects shall have discontinued any GERD medications for at least 7 days prior to testing.
* Subjects with symptomatic improvement on proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy demonstrated by a GERD-Health-Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL) score of ≤ 10 on proton-pump inhibitors and ≥ 15 off PPIs, or subjects with a ≥ 6 point improvement when comparing their on PPI and off PPI GERD-HRQL score
* GERD symptoms, in absence of PPI therapy (minimum 7 days)
* If the subject is of child bearing potential must have a negative pregnancy test within one week prior to implant and must agree to use effective means of birth control during the course of the study
* Subject is willing and able to cooperate with follow-up examinations
* Subject has been informed of the study procedures and the treatment and has signed an informed consent form
Exclusion Criteria
* Currently being treated with another investigational drug or investigational device
* History of gastroesophageal surgery, anti-reflux procedures, or gastroesophageal/gastric cancer
* Any previous endoscopic anti-reflux intervention for GERD
* Suspected or confirmed esophageal or gastric cancer
* Any size hiatal hernia \>3cm as determined by endoscopy
* Distal esophageal motility (average of sensors 3 and 4) is less than 35 mmHg peristaltic amplitude on wet swallows or \<70% (propulsive) peristaltic sequences
* Esophagitis - Grade C or D (LA Classification)
* Body Mass Index (BMI)\>35
* Symptoms of dysphagia more than once per week within the last 3 months.
* Diagnosed with Scleroderma
* Diagnosed with an esophageal motility disorder such as but not limited to Achalasia, Nutcracker Esophagus, or Diffuse Esophageal Spasm or Hypertensive LES
* Subject has a history of or known esophageal stricture or gross esophageal anatomic abnormalities (Schatzki's ring, obstructive lesions, etc.)
* Subject has esophageal or gastric varices
* Subject has history of or known Barrett's esophagus
* Cannot understand trial requirements or is unable to comply with follow-up schedule
* Pregnant or nursing, or plans to become pregnant during the course of the study
* Medical illness (i.e. congestive heart failure) that may cause the subject to be non-compliant with or able to meet the protocol requirements or is associated with limited life expectancy (i.e. less than 3 years)
* Diagnosed psychiatric disorder (e.g. bipolar, schizophrenia, etc.), subjects that exhibit depression that are on appropriate medication(s) are allowable.
* Suspected or known allergies to titanium, stainless steel, nickel or ferrous materials
* Subject has an electrical implant or metallic, abdominal implants
18 Years
75 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Torax Medical Incorporated
INDUSTRY
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
USC Keck School of Medicine
Los Angeles, California, United States
University of California - San Diego
San Diego, California, United States
Mayo Clinic
Jacksonville, Florida, United States
Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital
Albany, Georgia, United States
Abbott Northwestern Hospital/MNGI
Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States
Washington University - Division of Gastroenterology
St Louis, Missouri, United States
University of Rochester Medical Center
Rochester, New York, United States
The Ohio State University Medical Center / Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery
Columbus, Ohio, United States
Knox Community Hospital
Mount Vernon, Ohio, United States
Legacy Health System
Portland, Oregon, United States
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
University of Washington Medical Center
Seattle, Washington, United States
Gundersen Lutheran Clinic
La Crosse, Wisconsin, United States
Academic Medical Center
Amsterdam, , Netherlands
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Ganz RA, Edmundowicz SA, Taiganides PA, Lipham JC, Smith CD, DeVault KR, Horgan S, Jacobsen G, Luketich JD, Smith CC, Schlack-Haerer SC, Kothari SN, Dunst CM, Watson TJ, Peters J, Oelschlager BK, Perry KA, Melvin S, Bemelman WA, Smout AJ, Dunn D. Long-term Outcomes of Patients Receiving a Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation Device for Gastroesophageal Reflux. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 May;14(5):671-7. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2015.05.028. Epub 2015 Jun 2.
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. Esophageal sphincter device for gastroesophageal reflux disease. N Engl J Med. 2013 Feb 21;368(8):719-27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1205544.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
1802
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.