[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
February 27, 1987

The Angelchik Antireflux Prosthesis

Author Affiliations



JAMA. 1987;257(8):1050-1051. doi:10.1001/jama.1987.03390080040021

To the Editor.—  It is my understanding that, of the 24 DATTA panelists who assessed the Angelchik antireflux prosthesis,1 few were surgeons and of these even fewer had ever implanted this antireflux device. Eight of the panelists found the device unacceptable.The conclusions of this well-re-searched article are not supported by the data presented therein. It is my belief that if you take the other major procedures for antireflux surgery—like Nissen's fundoplication, Hill's procedure, or the Belsey operation—and present them to a panel of 24 surgeons, one third will probably find any one of these procedures unacceptable simply because these surgeons employ one of the other procedures and find it satisfactory. In the case of 24 physicians who are not specialist surgeons, I cannot begin to imagine what the conclusions would be.The article mentions that of the 7721 protheses with vulcanized straps that were used from 1979 through