Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty for treatment of class 1 and 2 obesity (MERIT): a prospective, multicentre, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is an endolumenal, organ-sparing therapy for obesity, with wide global adoption. We aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of ESG with lifestyle modifications compared with lifestyle modifications alone. METHODS: We conducted a randomised clinical trial at nine US centres, enrolling individuals aged 21-65 years with class 1 or class 2 obesity and who agreed to comply with lifelong dietary restrictions. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1·5; with stratified permuted blocks) to ESG with lifestyle modifications (ESG group) or lifestyle modifications alone (control group), with potential retightening or crossover to ESG, respectively, at 52 weeks. Lifestyle modifications included a low-calorie diet and physical activity. Participants in the primary ESG group were followed up for 104 weeks. The primary endpoint at 52 weeks was the percentage of excess weight loss (EWL), with excess weight being that over the ideal weight for a BMI of 25 kg/m2. Secondary endpoints included change in metabolic comorbidities between the groups. We used multiple imputed intention-to-treat analyses with mixed-effects models. Our analyses were done on a per-protocol basis and a modified intention-to-treat basis. The safety population was defined as all participants who underwent ESG (both primary and crossover ESG) up to 52 weeks. FINDINGS: Between Dec 20, 2017, and June 14, 2019, 209 participants were randomly assigned to ESG (n=85) or to control (n=124). At 52 weeks, the primary endpoint of mean percentage of EWL was 49·2% (SD 32·0) for the ESG group and 3·2% (18·6) for the control group (p<0·0001). Mean percentage of total bodyweight loss was 13·6% (8·0) for the ESG group and 0·8% (5·0) for the control group (p<0·0001), and 59 (77%) of 77 participants in the ESG group reached 25% or more of EWL at 52 weeks compared with 13 (12%) of 110 in the control group (p<0·0001). At 52 weeks, 41 (80%) of 51 participants in the ESG group had an improvement in one or more metabolic comorbidities, whereas six (12%) worsened, compared with the control group in which 28 (45%) of 62 participants had similar improvement, whereas 31 (50%) worsened. At 104 weeks, 41 (68%) of 60 participants in the ESG group maintained 25% or more of EWL. ESG-related serious adverse events occurred in three (2%) of 131 participants, without mortality or need for intensive care or surgery. INTERPRETATION: ESG is a safe intervention that resulted in significant weight loss, maintained at 104 weeks, with important improvements in metabolic comorbidities. ESG should be considered as a synergistic weight loss intervention for patients with class 1 or class 2 obesity. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03406975. FUNDING: Apollo Endosurgery, Mayo Clinic.

Lower incidence of dysphagia with cervical arthroplasty compared with ACDF in a prospective randomized clinical trial.

STUDY DESIGN: The current study of 251 consecutive 1-level anterior cervical reconstructions was undertaken to compare the incidence of dysphagia between cervical disk replacement and conventional anterior cervical fusion and instrumentation. OBJECTIVES: This is a report of 251 patients from 5 investigational centers in the Food and drug Administration's prospective, randomized porous-coated motion (PCM) trial using a validated dysphagia outcomes instrument. The dysphagia data for both PCM and anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) patients were reviewed from 5 centers to (1) compare the severity of dysphagia, (2) compare the postoperative incidence of dysphagia, and (3) to compare the resolution of perioperative dysphagia. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Dysphagia and dysphonia after anterior surgical approaches to the cervical spine have been previously reported. The current prospective, randomized investigation quantifies clinical dysphagia based on 3 criteria-severity, incidence, and resolution-in a time-course evaluation. METHODS: Patients between 18 and 65 years with 1-level symptomatic cervical radiculopathy and/or myelopathy for progressive neurologic symptoms, were randomized to undergo anterior decompression and PCM arthroplasty (N=151) or ACDF (control) (N=100). Patients self-reported dysphagia severity using the Bazaz scale preoperatively and at follow-up. The Bazaz scale has 4 classes of severity based upon the problems with swallowing that the patient has with both liquids and solids. RESULTS: The Bazaz results demonstrate that although both the PCM and ACDF groups exhibited an initial postoperative problem with swallowing, the PCM group continued to improve with increasing time after implantation, whereas the ACDF only improved minimally. The PCM treatments indicated significantly lower incidence of dysphagia at 3 and 12 months postoperatively compared with ACDF controls (P<0.05). An increase in dysphagia severity at either the 6-week or 3-month follow-up visit was reported in 35 (42%) PCM and 29 (64%) ACDF subjects. Long-term resolution of these symptoms was noted in 74% (26/35) of the PCM subjects as compared with 41.4% (12/29) of the ACDF subjects (P=0.015). CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective randomized clinical study the incidence of postoperative dysphagia and the long-term resolution of the dysphagia was greatly improved in the PCM group compared with the instrumented ACDF control group.

Prospective controlled trial of STAR total ankle replacement versus ankle fusion: initial results.

BACKGROUND: Mobile-bearing ankle replacements have become popular outside of the United States over the past two decades. The goal of the present study was to perform a prospective evaluation of the safety and efficacy of a mobile-bearing prosthesis to treat end stage ankle arthritis. We report the results of three separate cohorts of patients: a group of Scandanavian Total Ankle Replacement (STAR) patients and a control group of ankle fusion patients (the Pivotal Study Groups) and another group of STAR total ankle patients (Continued Access Group) whose surgery was performed following the completion of enrollment in the Pivotal Study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Pivotal Study design was a non-inferiority study using ankle fusion as the control. A non-randomized multi-centered design with concurrent fusion controls was used. We report the initial perioperative findings up to 24 months following surgery. For an individual patient to be considered an overall success, all of the following criteria needed to be met: a) a 40-point improvement in total Buechel-Pappas ankle score, b) no device failures, revisions, or removals, c) radiographic success, and d) no major complications. In the Pivotal Study (9/00 to 12/01), 158 ankle replacement and 66 arthrodesis procedures were performed; in the Continued Access Study (4/02 to 10/06), 448 ankle replacements were performed, of which 416 were at minimum 24 months post-surgery at time of the database closure. RESULTS: Major complications and need for secondary surgical intervention were more common in the Pivotal Study arthroplasty group than the Pivotal Study ankle fusion group. In the Continued Access Group, secondary procedures performed on these arthroplasty patients decreased by half when compared with the Pivotal Arthroplasty Group. When the Pivotal Groups were compared, treatment efficacy was higher for the ankle replacement group due to improvement in functional scores. Pain relief was equivalent between fusion and replacement patients. The hypothesis of non-inferiority of ankle replacement was met for overall patient success. CONCLUSION: By 24 months, ankles treated with STAR ankle replacement (in both the Pivotal and Continued Access Groups) had better function and equivalent pain relief as ankles treated with fusion.

Cervical disc replacement in patients with and without previous adjacent level fusion surgery: a prospective study.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective 6-center study. OBJECTIVE.: To evaluate outcomes of cervical disc replacement performed adjacent to a prior cervical fusion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The use of disc replacement adjacent to a prior anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) is an attractive reconstructive option, obviating the need for a multilevel fusion. This study reports outcomes from patients with and without previous ACDF receiving the porous coated motion (PCM) artificial cervical disc in a United States Federal Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption trials. METHODS: Patients between ages of 18 and 65 with single-level cervical radiculopathy and/or myelopathy, unresponsive to at least 6 weeks of nonsurgical therapy, or experiencing progressive neurologic symptoms were enrolled. Clinical outcomes are compared for patients receiving a PCM disc at a level adjacent to a prior ACDF ("adjacent") and those without having previously had fusion ("primary"). RESULTS: 126 PCM patients were primary (mean age: 44.4 years.) and 26 patients had previous "adjacent level" fusion surgery (mean age: 46.4 years). Surgery time was similar in both groups (96 minutes and 98 minutes, respectively; P = 0.761), and mean blood loss was 76 mL and 66 mL in the 2 groups, respectively (P = 0.491). Clinical outcomes using Neck Disability Index and Visual Analog Scores neck and arm scores showed significant improvement after surgery and were similar between groups at all time points. Revision surgery occurred in 2 of 126 primary patients, and in 2 of 26 patients in the adjacent-to-fusion group. CONCLUSION: Although the level adjacent to a prior cervical fusion is subject to increased biomechanical forces, potentially leading to a higher risk of failure, the PCM disc was well tolerated in the short term. The early clinical results of disc replacement adjacent to a prior fusion are good and comparable to the outcomes after primary disc replacement surgery. However, in view of the small study population and short-term follow-up, continued study is mandatory.