Skip to main content
. 2022 May 14;7(9):340–343. doi: 10.1016/j.vgie.2022.04.001

Table 1.

Clinical and demographic data of the 4 patients who underwent the antireflux band mucosectomy procedure

Pre-ARBM
Patient Age/sex Esophagitis (Y or N) Esophagitis grade (A, B, C, D) Hiatal hernia (Y or N) Hiatal hernia size (cm) DeMeester score % Time pH < 4
1 58/M N NA Y <1 28 7.4
2 70/F N NA N 0 33 25
3 65/F N NA N 0 26 33
4 48/M Y A Y 2 45 55
Post-ARBM
Patient Age/sex Esophagitis (Y or N) Esophagitis grade (A, B, C, D) Hiatal hernia (Y or N) Hiatal hernia size (cm) DeMeester score % Time pH < 4
1 58/M N NA Y <1 1.5 0.4
2 70/F N NA N 0 10 3
3 65/F N NA N 0 8 5
4 48/M Y A Y 2 11 9
ARBM procedure
Patient Age/sex Procedure technical success (Y or N) Number of bands deployed Procedure time (minutes) Periprocedural AEs Immediate AEs (0-24 hours) Delayed AEs (24+ hours)
1 58/M Y 4 6 No No No
2 70/F Y 6 12 No No No
3 65/F Y 6 14 No No No
4 48/M Y 6 15 No No No

AEs, Adverse events; ARBM, antireflux band mucosectomy; F, female; M, male; N, no; NA, not applicable; Y, yes.