Open vs laparoscopic partial posterior fundoplication. A prospective randomized trial

Robotic surgery versus Laparoscopic surgery for anti-reflux and hiatal hernia surgery: a short-term outcomes and cost systematic literature review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The objective of this study is to compare the operative time, intraoperative complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, mortality, and cost associated with Robotic Surgery (RS) and Laparascopic Surgery (LS) in anti-reflux and hiatal hernia surgery.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted using MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science and Scopus databases. Studies comparing short-term outcomes and cost between RS and LS in patients with anti-reflux and hiatal hernia were included. Data on operative time, complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, mortality, and cost were extracted. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the MINORS scale.

RESULTS

Fourteen retrospective observational studies involving a total of 555,368 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed no statistically significant difference in operative time, intraoperative complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, and mortality between RS and LS. However, LS was associated with lower costs compared to RS.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that RS has non-inferior short-term outcomes in anti-reflux and hiatal hernia surgery, compared to LS. LS is more cost-effective, but RS offers potential benefits such as improved visualization and enhanced surgical techniques. Further research, including randomized controlled trials and long-term outcome studies, is needed to validate and refine these findings.

Providing complex GI surgical care with minimally invasive approaches: a survey of the practice patterns of Fellowship Council alumni

INTRODUCTION

The Fellowship Council (FC) oversees 172 non-ACGME surgical fellowships offering 211 fellowship positions per year. These training programs cover multiple specialties including Advanced gastrointestinal (GI), Advanced GI/MIS, Bariatric, Hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB), Flexible Endoscopy, Colorectal, and Thoracic Surgery. Although some data have been published detailing the practice environments (i.e., urban vs. rural) and yearly total case volumes of FC alumni, there is a lack of granular data regarding the practice patterns of FC graduates. The aim of this study was to gather detailed data on the specific case types performed and surgical approaches employed by recent FC alumni.

METHODS

A 21-item survey covering 64 data points was emailed to 835 FC alumni who completed their fellowship between 2013 and 2017. Email addresses were obtained from FC program directors and FC archives.

RESULTS

We received 327 responses (39% response rate). HPB, Advanced Colorectal, and Advanced Thoracic alumni appear to establish practices focused on their respective fields. Graduates from Advanced GI, Adv GI/MIS, and Bariatric programs appear to build practices with a mix of several complex GI case types including bariatrics, colorectal, foregut, HPB, and hernia cases.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first large data set to provide granular information on the practice patterns of FC alumni. FC trained surgeons perform impressive volumes of complex procedures, and minimally invasive approaches are extremely prevalent in these practices. Further, many graduates carve out practices with large footprints in robotics and endoscopy.

Comparative Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes and Costs Between Laparoscopic and Open Antireflux Surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic antireflux surgery (LARS) has proven to be as effective as open antireflux surgery (OARS), but it is associated with a shorter hospital stay and a faster recover. The aims of this study were to assess the national use of LARS in the US and to compare the perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open antireflux procedures in a national cohort.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective population-based analysis was performed using the National Inpatient Sample for the period 2000 to 2013. The study included adult patients (18 years and older) diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), who underwent either laparoscopic or open fundoplication. Multivariable linear and logistic regression, adjusted for patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics were used to assess the effect of the laparoscopic approach on patient outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 75,544 patients were included, with 44,089 having LARS (58.4%) and 31,455 having OARS (41.6%). The rate of laparoscopic procedures increased from 24.8 LARS per 100 procedures in 2000, to 84.3 LARS per 100 procedures in 2013 (p < 0.0001). Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery were less likely to experience postoperative venous thromboembolism, wound complications, infection, esophageal perforation, bleeding, cardiac failure, renal failure, respiratory failure, shock, and inpatient mortality. On average, the laparoscopic approach reduced length of stay by 2.1 days, and decreased hospital charges by $9,530.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the laparoscopic approach for the surgical treatment of GERD has increased significantly in the last decade in the US. This approach is associated with lower morbidity and mortality, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs for the health care system.

A meta-analysis of long follow-up outcomes of laparoscopic Nissen (total) versus Toupet (270°) fundoplication for gastro-esophageal reflux disease based on randomized controlled trials in adults

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) is the most common surgical procedure for the surgical management of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). Laparoscopic Toupet fundoplication (LTF) has been reported to have a lower prevalence of postoperative complications yet still obtain a similar level of reflux control. We conducted a meta-analysis to confirm the value of LNF and LTF.

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and Springerlink were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LNF and LTF. Data regarding the benefits and adverse results of two techniques were extracted and compared using a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eight eligible RCTs comparing LNF (n = 625) and LTF (n = 567) were identified. There were no significant differences between LNF and LTF with regard to hospitalization duration, perioperative complications, patient satisfaction, postoperative heartburn, regurgitation, postoperative DeMeester scores, or esophagites. A shorter operative time and higher postoperative lower esophageal sphincter pressure were associated with LNF. Prevalence of postoperative dysphagia, gas-bloating, inability to belch, dilatation for dysphagia and reoperation were higher after LNF, but subgroup analyses showed that differences with respect to dysphagia between LNF and LTF disappeared over time. Subgroup analyses did not support "tailored therapy" according to preoperative esophageal motility.

CONCLUSIONS

LNF and LTF have equivalently good control of GERD and result in a similar prevalence of patient satisfaction. Based on current evidence, it is not rational or advisable to abandon LNF when choosing a surgical procedure for GERD.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for gastroesophageal reflux disease 2015

As an increase in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been reported in Japan, and public interest in GERD has been increasing, the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology published the Evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines for GERD (1st edition) in 2009. Six years have passed since its publication, and there have been a large number of reports in Japan concerning the epidemiology, pathophysiology, treatment, and Barrett's esophagus during this period. By incorporating the contents of these reports, the guidelines were completely revised, and a new edition was published in October 2015. The revised edition consists of eight items: epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, internal treatment, surgical treatment, esophagitis after surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract, extraesophageal symptoms, and Barrett's esophagus. This paper summarizes these guidelines, particularly the parts related to the treatment for GERD. In the present revision, aggressive proton pump inhibitor (PPI) maintenance therapy is recommended for severe erosive GERD, and on-demand therapy or continuous maintenance therapy is recommended for mild erosive GERD or PPI-responsive non-erosive GERD. Moreover, PPI-resistant GERD (insufficient symptomatic improvement and/or esophageal mucosal break persisting despite the administration of PPI at a standard dose for 8 weeks) is defined, and a standard-dose PPI twice a day, change in PPI, change in the PPI timing of dosing, addition of a prokinetic drug, addition of rikkunshito (traditional Japanese herbal medicine), and addition of histamine H2-receptor antagonist are recommended for its treatment. If no improvement is observed even after these treatments, pathophysiological evaluation with esophageal impedance-pH monitoring or esophageal manometry at an expert facility for diseases of the esophagus is recommended.

Short- and long-term results of laparoscopic versus open anti-reflux surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

There is an ongoing debate about whether laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery (LARS) or open anti-reflux surgery (OARS) is the better option for the surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This study was aimed to evaluate and compare the short- and long-term results of both surgical strategies by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library) for studies published from 1970 to 2013 was performed. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared LARS with OARS were included. We analyzed the outcomes of each type of surgery over short- and long-term periods.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met final inclusion criteria (total n = 1,067). A total of 510 patients underwent OARS and 557 had LARS. The pooled analyses showed, despite of longer operation time, the hospital stay and sick leave were significantly reduced in the LARS group. Significant reductions were also observed in complication rates for the LARS group in both short (odds ratio (OR) 0.31, 95 % CI 0.17 to 0.56) and long-term periods (OR 0.24, 95 % CI 0.07 to 0.80). Although complaints of reflux symptoms were more frequent among LARS patients in the short-term follow-up, LARS achieved better control of reflux symptoms in the long-term period (P < 0.05). Reoperation rate, patient's satisfaction, and 24-h pH monitoring were all comparable between the two groups (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

LARS is an effective and safe alternative of OARS for the surgical treatment of GERD, which enables a faster convalescence, better control of long-term reflux symptoms, and with reduced risk of complications.

Laparoscopy in the era of enhanced recovery

Laparoscopy is one of the cornerstones in the surgical revolution and transformed outcome and recovery for various surgical procedures. Even if these changes were widely accepted for basic interventions, like appendectomies and cholecystectomies, laparoscopy still remains challenged for more advanced operations in many aspects. Despite these discussion, there is an overwhelming acceptance in the surgical community that laparoscopy did transform the recovery for several abdominal procedures. The importance of improved peri-operative patient management and its influence on outcome started to become a focus of attention 20 years ago and is now increasingly spreading, as shown by the incoming volume of data on this topic. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concept incorporates simple measures of general management, and requires multidisciplinary collaboration from hospital staff as well as the patient and the relatives. Several studies have demonstrated a significant decrease in postoperative complication rate, length of hospital stay and reduced overall cost. The key elements of success are fluid restriction, a functioning epidural and preoperative carbohydrate intake. With the expansion of laparoscopic techniques, ERAS increasingly incorporates laparoscopic patients, especially in colorectal surgery. However, the precise impact of laparoscopy on ERAS is still not clearly defined. Increasing evidence suggests that laparoscopy itself is an additional ERAS item that should be considered as routine where feasible in order to obtain the best surgical outcomes.

[The Mexican consensus on gastroesophageal reflux disease. Part II]

OBJECTIVE

To update the themes of endoscopic and surgical treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) from the Mexican Consensus published in 2002.

METHODS

Part I of the 2011 Consensus dealt with the general concepts, diagnosis, and medical treatment of this disease. Part II covers the topics of the endoscopic and surgical treatment of GERD. In this second part, an expert in endoscopy and an expert in GERD surgery, along with the three general coordinators of the consensus, carried out an extensive bibliographic review using the Embase, Cochrane, and Medline databases. Statements referring to the main aspects of endoscopic and surgical treatment of this disease were elaborated and submitted to specialists for their consideration and vote, utilizing the modified Delphi method. The statements were accepted into the consensus if the level of agreement was 67% or higher.

RESULTS

Twenty-five statements corresponding to the endoscopic and surgical treatment of GERD resulted from the voting process, and they are presented herein as Part II of the consensus. The majority of the statements had an average level of agreement approaching 90%.

CONCLUSION

Currently, endoscopic treatment of GERD should not be regarded as an option, given that the clinical results at 3 and 5 years have not demonstrated durability or sustained symptom remission. The surgical indications for GERD are well established; only those patients meeting the full criteria should be candidates and their surgery should be performed by experts.

Update on fundoplication for the treatment of GERD

Rudolph Nissen firstly implemented the idea of surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux more than 55 years ago. Today, laparoscopic fundoplication has become the surgical "golden standard" for the treatment of GERD. However, the initial enthusiasm and increasing number of performed procedures in the early 1990s declined dramatically between 2000 and 2006. Despite its excellent outcome, laparoscopic fundoplication is only offered to a minority of patients who are suffering from GERD. In this article we review the current indications for antireflux surgery, technical and intraoperative aspects of fundoplication, perioperative complications as well as short and long-term outcome. The focus is on the laparoscopic approach as the current surgical procedure of choice.

The laparoscopic approach to paraesophageal hernia repair

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair continues to be one of the most challenging procedures facing the minimally invasive surgeon.

DISCUSSION

A thorough understanding of the tenets of the operation and advanced skills in minimally invasive laparoscopy are needed for long-term freedom from symptomatic and anatomic recurrence. These include complete reduction of the hernia sac from the mediastinum back into the abdomen with careful preservation of the integrity of muscle and peritoneal lining of the crura, aggressive and complete mobilization of the esophagus to the level of the inferior pulmonary vein, vagal preservation, clear identification of the gastroesophageal junction to allow accurate assessment of the intraabdominal esophageal length, and use of Collis gastroplasty when esophageal lengthening is required for a tension-free intraabdominal repair. Liberal mobilization of the phrenosplenic and phrenogastric attachments substantially increases the mobility of the left limb of the crura, allowing for a tension-free primary closure in a large percentage of patients.

CONCLUSION

The following describes our current approach to laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair following a decade of refinement in a high-volume center.

A meta-analysis comparing laparoscopic partial versus Nissen fundoplication

BACKGROUND

For proven gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, partial fundoplication is considered as effective as Nissen, but with fewer side effects. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the effect of laparoscopic partial fundoplication (LPF) with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF).

METHODS

Extensive medical literature searches of the PubMed, Medline and Embase databases were performed up to April 2010 for all randomized clinical trials that compared LPF versus LNF. The effect variables analysed were the incidence of post-operative dysphagia, heartburn, inability to belch, outcome or satisfaction and Visick score. Meta-analyses were carried out using odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized trials were considered suitable for the meta-analysis. A total of 1374 patients underwent LPF or LNF. There was a significant reduction of the incidence of post-operative dysphagia (OR = 0.44, P < 0.0001) and inability to belch (OR = 0.41, P < 0.005) for the LPF compared to that of the LNF group. Compared with LPF, LNF resulted in a significant reduction of the incidence of post-operative heartburn (OR = 1.94, P < 0.01). The outcome or satisfaction of patients and Visick I and II scores were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Both LPF and LNF are effective for the treatment of proven gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. LPF enables a decreased post-operative dysphagia and gas-related side effects, while LNF is more successful in controlling reflux symptoms, particularly heartburn, than LPF. A balance should be found between anti-reflux and side effects.

Twenty years of laparoscopic fundoplication for GERD

The first laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication was performed 20 years ago. Surgical management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) should be offered only to appropriately studied and selected patients, with the ultimate aim of improving the well-being of the individual, the "quality of life." The choice of fundoplication should be dictated by the surgeon's preference and experience.

Total or posterior partial fundoplication in the treatment of GERD: results of a randomized trial after 2 decades of follow-up

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND

We lack long-term data (>10 years) on the efficacy of antireflux surgery when evaluated within the framework of randomized clinical trials Hereby we report the outcome of a randomized trial comparing open total (I) and a Toupet posterior partial fundoplication (II) performed between 1983 and 1991.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-seven patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease and were enrolled into the study. The mean follow up has now reached 18 years. During these years 26% had died and 16% were unable to trace for follow up. Symptom outcomes were assessed by the use of validated self-reporting questionnaires.

RESULTS

Long-term control of heartburn and acid regurgitation (reported as no or mild symptoms) were reported by 80% and 82% after a total fundoplication (I) and corresponding figures were 87% and 90% after a partial posterior fundoplication (II), respectively (n.s.).The dysphagia scores were low 4.6 ± 1.3 (SEM) in group I and 3.3 ± 0.9 (SEM) in group II (n.s). The point prevalences of rectal flatulence and gas distension related complaints were of similar magnitude in the 2 groups. Twenty-three percentage of the patients in the total fundoplication group noted some ability to vomit compared with 31% in the partial posterior fundoplication group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both a total and a partial posterior fundoplication maintain a high level of reflux control after 2 decades of follow up. The previously reported differences in mechanical side effects, in favor of the partial wrap, seemed to disappear over time.

Laparoscopic surgery for pancreatic tumors

The rapid growth of minimally invasive technology and experience in recent decades has revolutionized many aspects of oncologic surgery. Adoption of laparoscopic pancreatectomy has been slow due to the inherent anatomic complexity of pancreatic surgery, as well as concerns of perioperative complications and compromised oncologic results. With increasing surgeon experience and growing data, laparoscopic pancreatic resection is generating considerable attention and enthusiasm. This article provides an overview of laparoscopic pancreatic tumor surgery with respect to tumor biology and technical approaches. Current applications of laparoscopic approaches to left pancreatectomy, tumor enucleation, central pancreatectomy, and pancreaticoduodenectomy for treatment of pancreatic tumors are considered in light of available evidence demonstrating feasibility, safety, and oncologic efficacy. Future directions in minimally invasive pancreatic surgery are explored.

Endoscopic and laparoscopic treatment of gastroesophageal reflux

Gastroesophageal reflux is extremely common in Western countries. For selected patients, there is an established role for the surgical treatment of reflux, and possibly an emerging role for endoscopic antireflux procedures. Randomized trials have compared medical versus surgical management, laparoscopic versus open surgery and partial versus total fundoplications. However, the evidence base for endoscopic procedures is limited to some small sham-controlled studies, and cohort studies with short-term follow-up. Laparoscopic fundoplication has been shown to be an effective antireflux operation. It facilitates quicker convalescence and is associated with fewer complications, but has a similar longer term outcome compared with open antireflux surgery. In most randomized trials, antireflux surgery achieves at least as good control of reflux as medical therapy, and these studies support a wider application of surgery for the treatment of moderate-to-severe reflux. Laparoscopic partial fundoplication is an effective surgical procedure with fewer side effects, and it may achieve high rates of patient satisfaction at late follow-up. Many of the early endoscopic antireflux procedures have failed to achieve effective reflux control, and they have been withdrawn from the market. Newer procedures have the potential to fashion a surgical fundoplication. However, at present there is insufficient evidence to establish the safety and efficacy of endoscopic procedures for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux, and no endoscopic procedure has achieved equivalent reflux control to that achieved by surgical fundoplication.

Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing open and laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis of randomized evidence to determine the relative merits of laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery (LARS) and open anti-reflux surgery (OARS) for proven gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS

A search of the Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index, Current Contents, and PubMed databases identified all randomized clinical trials that compared LARS and OARS and that were published in the English language between 1990 and 2007. A meta-analysis was carried out in accordance with the QUOROM (Quality of Reporting of Meta-Analyses) statement. The six outcome variables analyzed were operating time, hospital stay, return to normal activity, perioperative complications, treatment failure, and requirement for further surgery. Random-effects meta-analyses were carried out using odds ratios (ORs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs).

RESULTS

Twelve trials were considered suitable for the meta-analysis. A total of 503 patients underwent OARS and 533 had LARS. For three of the six outcomes, the summary point estimates favored LARS over OARS. There was a significant reduction of 2.68 days in the duration of hospital stay for the LARS group compared with that for the OARS group (WMD: -2.68, 95% confidence interval (CI): -3.54 to -1.81; P<0.0001), a significant reduction of 7.75 days in return to normal activity for the LARS group compared with that for the OARS group (WMD: -7.75, 95% CI: -14.37 to -1.14; P=0.0216), and finally, there was a statistically significant reduction of 65% in the relative odds of complication rates for the LARS group compared with that for the OARS group (OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.16-0.75; P=0.0072). The duration of operating time was significantly longer (39.02 min) in the LARS group (WMD: 39.02, 95% CI: 17.99-60.05; P=0.0003). Treatment failure rates were comparable between the two groups (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 0.71-2.72; P=0.3423). Despite this, the requirement for further surgery was significantly higher in the LARS group (OR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.00-3.22; P=0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of this meta-analysis, the authors conclude that LARS is an effective and safe alternative to OARS for the treatment of proven GERD. LARS enables a faster convalescence and return to productive activity, with a reduced risk of complications and a similar treatment outcome, than an open approach. However, there is a significantly higher rate of re-operation (79%) in the LARS group.

Prevalence of symptoms and use of medication for gastroesophageal reflux in an Australian community

INTRODUCTION

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is common in Western societies, although the prevalence of reflux symptoms in the community is not well described. In this study we determined the prevalence of symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux and other "esophageal" symptoms, and the consumption of medication for reflux in an Australian community.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A population sample designed to accurately reflect the characteristics of the population aged 15 years or older in the State of South Australia was studied. Demographic data; symptoms specific to reflux, dysphagia, and abdominal bloating; and the consumption of antireflux medication were determined in a face-to-face interview. The frequency and severity of heartburn and dysphagia were assessed with analog scales.

RESULTS

A total of 2,973 people (age range: 15-95 years) were interviewed between September and December 2006. Approximately half experienced the symptom of heartburn; 21.2% experienced heartburn at least once a month, and 12.4% described frequent symptoms of heartburn (at least a few times each week). Of those with heartburn, 25.0% graded it as moderate or severe, 10.9% reported some dysphagia for solid foods, and 6.9% reported dysphagia for liquids. 3.7% described dysphagia for solids at least once a month. Abdominal bloating was reported by 48.2%. 16.9% were taking medications for reflux symptoms (10.1% proton pump inhibitors, 1.2% H2-receptor antagonists, 2.1% simple antacids, 3.4% alternative medications). Heartburn was more common in individuals who consumed medication. There were significant associations between heartburn and bloating, and between heartburn and dysphagia.

CONCLUSIONS

Symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux and the use of medications to treat such symptoms are very common in the community of South Australia. Nearly 1 in 7 people over the age of 15 consume medication for the treatment of symptoms of reflux.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease in children: efficacy of Nissen fundoplication in treating digestive and respiratory symptoms. Experience of a single center

Fundoplication has been commonly performed in neurologically impaired and normal children with complicated gastroesophageal reflux disease. The relationship between gastroesophageal reflux disease and respiratory diseases is still unclear. We aimed to compare results of open and laparoscopic procedures, as well as the impact of fundoplication over digestive and respiratory symptoms. From January 2000 to June 2007, 151 children underwent Nissen fundoplication. Data were prospectively collected regarding age at surgery, presence of neurologic handicap, symptoms related to reflux (digestive or respiratory, including recurrent lung infections and reactive airways disease), surgical approach, concomitant procedures, complications, and results. Mean age was 6 years and 9 months. Eighty-two children (54.3%) had neurological handicaps. The surgical approach was laparoscopy in 118 cases and laparotomy in 33. Dysphagia occurred in 23 patients submitted to laparoscopic and none to open procedure (P = 0.01). A total of 86.6% of patients with digestive symptoms had complete resolution or significant improvement of the problems after the surgery. A total of 62.2% of children with recurrent lung infections showed any reduction in the frequency of pneumonias. Only 45.2% of patients with reactive airway disease had any relief from bronchospasm episodes after fundoplication. The comparisons demonstrated that Nissen fundoplication was more effective for the resolution of digestive symptoms than to respiratory manifestations (P = 0.04). Open or laparoscopic fundoplication are safe procedures with acceptable complication indices and the results of the surgery are better for digestive than for respiratory symptoms.