So I'm watching last week's Grey's Anatomy and they were talking about a magnetic esophageal sphincter for reflux. So I googled it. This was just one of many articles...

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/779727

Anyone's doctor or surgeon ever mention this as an option to medication or conversion to Bypass? I haven't had any issues with reflux postop (knock on wood). But after totally curing my C. diff infection with an "experimental" fecal transplant, I'm all about exploring options outside the box.

Of course is is in very preliminary stages and I guess I could see it having similar scarring issues like the Lapband, but still, it's an interesting approach.

Edited May 16, 201412 yr by Kindle

Outstanding piece of work.

Here's something you want to look out for: "

"The limitation there is this was not a randomized, controlled study," Dr. Deas told Medscape Medical News. "It's hard, without randomizing patients, to differentiate what is truly a benefit from the intervention and what is perhaps a placebo effect.

Study limitations included the lack of a control group and a study design that precludes direct comparisons with other therapies. The authors recommend follow-up prospective, randomized trials."

The problem is that double blind type placebo like studies are the gold standard. If you look at the list of conflicts of interest, this study had it. I think the other problem we need to look at, is that there is a conflict of interest here for the surgeons. They're going to make more money and keep you longer if you go to bypass.

This is more of a GI type of thing that goes to the surgeon. Most surgeons can be pretty conservative and they'd want to see more data before they'd risk it instead of a certain bypass.

Does that make sense?

It does. But like I said, this was just one of many articles that came up when I googled. Sounded like the animal studies showed good results and they had moved on to human testing. I even saw a few posts on GERD support forums from people who had it done (sorry, I didn't spend a lot of time researching extensively before posting this). Just thought I'd throw it out there for interested parties.

As for research studies on new treatments, in some cases, the "gold standard" can hinder and delay an easy cure for some diseases. In the case of my fecal transplant, I have yet to read any account of case studies that ranks it less than 90% successful in curing Clostridial difficile. Which, by the way, kills 10,000 Americans a year. But at this point, due to lack of really good "studies" it is considered experimental and insurance won't pay for it. In fact, the FDA tried to put a restriction on the procedure last summer, but they got so much shit from the doctors who had been having such huge successes with it that they retracted the ban in like two weeks.

Unfortunately, since donor poop is free, there is no incentive for any pharmaceutical company to pay for the research and studies required for FDA approval. There's no way to make money off of the procedure. So instead, victims are stuck with months and sometimes years of chronic diarrhea and dozens of rounds of (very expensive) antibiotics. I, fortunately, have a forward thinking PCP and a Gastroenterologist that were more than happy to do the procedure as soon as I asked. The CDC has already issued warnings about C. diff being the "new MRSA", but apparently a lot more people are going to have to die before the FDA and insurance companies take fecal transplants seriously.

Sorry for the rant, I'm just so proud of my new poop and thrilled to not be sick anymore.

No, you have a good point. We've got the issues of trying to be safe on the part of patients, compared to the $$$ interests of some. Its a very tough balancing act.