Laparoscopic revision of failed fundoplication and hiatal herniorraphy

Management of Recurrent Paraesophageal Hernia

Introduction: Recurrent paraesophageal hernias (rPEH) represent a clinical and surgical challenge. Even with a relatively high incidence, most of them are minimally symptomatic, and the need for reoperation is low. For those patients who are candidates for surgery, laparoscopic revision is a feasible and safe technique although there are other treatment options available. Methods: This article provides an overview of the definition, mechanisms of recurrence, epidemiology, clinical presentation, and indications for treatment of rPEH, as well as an overview of the surgical management options and a description of the technical principles of the repair and/or resection. Results: Surgeons should consider multiple factors when deciding the appropriate treatment of patients with rPEH, and all of them require a complete and comprehensive evaluation. The surgical options need to be individualized and include a redo PEH repair and revisional fundoplication, a partial or total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction, or an esophagectomy. There are key steps during the surgical repair that contribute to a successful operation and also auxiliary techniques that can improve postoperative outcomes. After laparoscopic redo most patients have improvement of their symptoms and an acceptable rate of perioperative complications when they are performed by experienced foregut surgeons. In obese patients with rPEH, bariatric surgery can be the best treatment option. Conclusions: Laparoscopic reoperative management should be considered in symptomatic patients who are not controlled with maximal nonoperative therapy, after a thorough work-up and appropriate counseling. In cases with multiple hernia repairs, it is important to consider alternative operations.

Postoperative Dysphagia Following Esophagogastric Fundoplication: Does the Timing to First Dilation Matter?

BACKGROUND

Postoperative dysphagia after anti-reflux surgery typically resolves in a few weeks. However, even after the initial swelling has resolved at 6 weeks, dysphagia can persist in 30% of patients necessitating esophageal dilation. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of esophageal dilation on postoperative dysphagia, the recurrence of reflux symptoms, and the efficacy of pneumatic dilations on postoperative dysphagia.

METHODS

A prospectively collected database was reviewed for patients who underwent partial/complete fundoplication with/without paraesophageal hernia repair between 2006 and 2014. Patient age, sex, BMI, DeMeester score, procedure type, procedure duration, length of stay, postoperative dysphagia, time to first pneumatic dilation, number of dilations, and the need for reoperations were collected.

RESULTS

The study included 902 consecutive patients, 71.3% females, with a mean age of 57.8 ± 14.7 years. Postoperative dysphagia was noted in 26.3% of patients, of whom 89% had complete fundoplication (p < 0.01). Endoscopic dilation was performed in 93 patients (10.3%) with 59 (63.4%) demonstrating persistent dysphagia. Recurrent reflux symptoms occurred in 35 (37.6%) patients who underwent endoscopic dilation. Patients who underwent a dilation for symptoms of dysphagia were less likely to require a revisional surgery later than patients who had dysphagia but did not undergo a dilation before revisional surgery (17.2% vs 41.7%, respectively, p < 0.001) in the 4-year follow-up period. The duration of initial dilation from surgery was inversely related to the need for revisional surgery (p = 0.047), while more than one dilation was not associated with additive benefit.

CONCLUSION

One attempt at endoscopic dilation of the esophagogastric fundoplication may provide relief in patients with postoperative dysphagia and can be used as a predictive factor for the need of revision. However, there is an increased risk for recurrent reflux symptoms and revisional surgery may ultimately be indicated for control of symptoms.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Redo Fundoplication in Patients With Failed Antireflux Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize the current available evidence regarding the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic redo fundoplication (LRF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although antireflux surgery is highly effective, a minority of patients will require a LRF due to recurrent symptoms, mechanical failure, or intolerable side-effects of the primary repair.

METHODS

A systematic electronic search on LRF was conducted in the Medline database and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Conversion and postoperative morbidity were used as primary endpoints to determine feasibility and safety. Symptom improvement, QoL improvement, and recurrence rates were used as secondary endpoints to assess efficacy. Heterogeneity across studies was tested with the Chi-square and the proportion of total variation attributable to heterogeneity was estimated by the inconsistency (I2) statistic. A random-effect model was used to generate a pooled proportion with 95% confidence interval (CI) across all studies.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies and 2,095 LRF were included. The mean age at reoperation was 53.3 years. The weighted pooled proportion of conversion was 6.02% (95% CI, 4.16%-8.91%) and the meta-analytic prevalence of major morbidity was 4.98% (95% CI, 3.31%-6.95%). The mean follow-up period was 25 (6-58) months. The weighted pooled proportion of symptom and QoL improvement was 78.50% (95% CI, 74.71%-82.03%) and 80.65% (95% CI, 75.80%-85.08%), respectively. The meta-analytic prevalence estimate of recurrence across the studies was 10.71% (95% CI, 7.74%-14.10%).

CONCLUSIONS

LRF is a feasible and safe procedure that provides symptom relief and improved QoL to the vast majority of patients. Although heterogeneously assessed, recurrence rates seem to be low. LRF should be considered a valuable treatment modality for patients with failed antireflux surgery.

Safety of robotic assisted laparoscopic recurrent paraesophageal hernia repair: insights from a large single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic repair of recurrent as opposed to primary paraesophageal hernias (PEHs) are historically associated with increased peri-operative complication rates, worsened outcomes, and increased conversion rates. The robotic platform may aid surgeons in these complex revision procedures. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing robotic assisted laparoscopic (RAL) repair of recurrent as opposed to primary PEHs.

METHODS

Patients undergoing RAL primary and recurrent PEH repairs from 2009 to 2017 at a single institution were reviewed. Demographics, use of mesh, estimated blood loss, intra-operative complications, conversion rates, operative time, rates of esophageal/gastric injury, hospital length of stay, re-admission/re-operation rates, recurrence, dysphagia, gas bloat, and pre- and post-operative proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use were analyzed. Analysis was accomplished using Chi-square test/Fischer's exact test for categorical variables and the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables.

RESULTS

There were 298 patients who underwent RAL PEH repairs (247 primary, 51 recurrent). They were followed for a median (interquartile range) of 120 (44, 470) days. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics between groups. Patients in the recurrent PEH group had longer operative times, increased use of mesh, and increased length of hospital stay. They were also less likely to undergo fundoplication. There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, incidence of intra-operative complications, re-admission rates, incidence of post-operative dysphagia and gas bloat, and incidence of post-operative PPI use. There were no conversions to open operative intervention or gastric/esophageal injury/leaks.

CONCLUSIONS

Although repair of recurrent PEHs are historically associated with worse outcomes, in this series, RAL recurrent PEH repairs have similar peri-operative and post-operative outcomes as compared to primary PEH repairs. Whether this is secondary to the potential advantages afforded by the robotic platform deserves further study.

Laparoendoscopic Single-Site (LESS) versus Robotic “Redo” Hiatal Hernia Repair with Fundoplication: Which Approach is Better?

Only a small percentage of patients fail laparoscopic fundoplications undertaken for gastroesophageal reflux disease. But because many laparoscopic fundoplications have been undertaken, surgeons frequently encounter patients in need of “redo” operations. This study was undertaken to evaluate the robotic approach versus laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) approach for redo fundoplications. With an Institutional Review Board approval, 64 patients undergoing LESS (n = 32) or robotic (n = 32) redo antireflux operations were prospectively followed up. Data are presented as median (mean + SD). For LESS versus robotic redo operations, the operative duration was 145 (143 ± 33.5) versus 196 (208 ± 76.7) minutes ( P < 0.01), estimated blood loss was 50 (80 ± 92.1) versus 20 (43 ± 57.1) mL ( P = 0.07), and length of stay was 1 (3 ± 5.4) versus 1 (2 ± 1.9) day ( P = 0.57); 1 LESS operation was converted to “open.” Operative duration was longer for men ( P = 0.01). Postoperative complications were not more frequent after Nissen (n = 36) or Toupet (n = 28) fundoplication, regardless of the approach. When matched by BMI, operative duration was prolonged by a large Type I to IV hiatal hernia ( P = 0.01). Symptoms improved dramatically and were similar with both approaches, and patient satisfaction was high. Robotic redo antireflux operations take longer than LESS operations. LESS and robotic redo antireflux operations are both safe and offer significant and similar amelioration of symptoms after failed fundoplications.

[Redo laparoscopic surgery for recurrent gastroesophageal reflux disease and hiatal hernia]

AIM

To assess mechanisms of recurrent gastroesophageal reflux disease and the ability to perform adequate surgical correction after previous surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The authors from various surgical centers have operated 2678 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease and hiatal hernia for the period 1993-2018. 127 (4.74%) patients underwent redo surgery for recurrent disease, 46 of them were previously operated in other clinics.

RESULTS

Median follow-up after redo surgery was 63 months (12-139). Satisfactory functional result was achieved in 76.4% of patients.

Laparoscopic revision surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease

Laparoscopic antireflux surgery is a frequently performed procedure for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux in surgical clinics. Reflux can recur in between 3% and 30% of patients on whom antireflux surgery has been performed, and so revision surgery can be required due to recurrent symptoms or dysphagia in approximately 3% to 6% of the patients. The objective of this study is to evaluate the mechanism of recurrences after antireflux surgery and to share our results after revision surgery in recurrent cases.From 2001 to 2014, revision surgery was performed on 43 patients (31 men, 12 women) between the ages of 24 and 70 years. The technical details of the first operation, recurrence symptoms, endoscopy, and manometry findings were evaluated. The findings of revision surgery, surgical techniques, morbidity rates, length of hospitalization, and follow-up period were also recorded and evaluated.The first operation was Nissen fundoplication in 34 patients and Toupet fundoplication in 9 patients. Mesh hiatoplasty was performed for enforcement in 18 (41.9%) of these patients. The period between the first operation and the revision surgery ranged from 4 days to 60 months. The most common finding was slipped fundoplication and presence of hiatal hernia during revision surgery. Revision fundoplication and hernia repair with mesh reinforcement were used in 33 patients. The other techniques were Collis gastroplasty, revision fundoplication, and hernia repair without mesh. The range of follow-up period was from 2 to 134 months. Recurrence occurred in 3 patients after revision surgery (6.9%). Although revision surgery is difficult and it has higher morbidity, it can be performed effectively and safely in experienced centers.

Evaluation of conventional laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic redo hiatal hernia and antireflux surgery: a cohort study

Surgery for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and hiatal hernia leads to recurrence or persisting dysphagia in a minority of patients. Redo antireflux surgery in GERD and hiatal hernia is known for higher morbidity and mortality. This study aims to evaluate conventional versus robot-assisted laparoscopic redo antireflux surgery, with the objective to detect possible advantages for the robot-assisted approach. A single institute cohort of 75 patients who underwent either conventional laparoscopic or robot-assisted laparoscopic redo surgery for recurrent GERD or severe dysphagia between 2008 and 2013 were included in the study. Baseline characteristics, symptoms, medical history, procedural data, hospital stay, complications and outcome were prospectively gathered. The main indications for redo surgery were dysphagia, pyrosis or a combination of both in combination with a proven anatomic abnormality. The mean time to redo surgery was 1.9 and 2.0 years after primary surgery for the conventional and robot-assisted groups, respectively. The number of conversions was lower in the robot-assisted group compared to conventional laparoscopy (1/45 vs. 5/30, p = 0.035) despite a higher proportion of patients with previous surgery by laparotomy (9/45 vs. 1/30, p = 0.038). Median hospital stay was reduced by 1 day (3 vs. 4, p = 0.042). There were no differences in mortality, complications or outcome. Robotic support, when available, can be regarded beneficial in redo surgery for GERD and hiatal hernia. Results of this observational study suggest technical feasibility for minimal-invasive robot-assisted redo surgery after open primary antireflux surgery, a reduced number of conversions and shorter hospital stay.

Imaging findings of successful and failed fundoplication

Postoperative imaging findings contribute to the diagnosis of successful and failed fundoplication procedures. Gastroesophageal reflux disease, a common illness in the United States, is primarily treated medically but may require surgery if there are persistent symptoms or reflux complications despite medical treatment. Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication has become the most used and successful surgical antireflux procedure since its introduction in 1991. Radiologists should understand the anatomy of the esophagogastric junction, antireflux and esophageal protective mechanisms, and preoperative radiologic findings that contribute to selection of the surgical technique, as well as the most commonly used antireflux operations and their indications. Barium examination and computed tomography of the thorax and abdomen play an important role in the follow-up of patients with gastric fundoplication, including evaluation of surgical effectiveness and detection and characterization of postoperative complications. Failed fundoplications are classified into six types: tight Nissen, incompetent repair, disruption of the wrap, stomach slippage above the diaphragm, slipped Nissen, and transdiaphragmatic wrap herniation. Classification is based on radiologic visualization of the obstructed esophageal lumen, recurrence of gastroesophageal reflux, integrity and location of the gastric wrap, stomach slippage, and recurrence of hiatal hernia. Imaging findings are useful in detecting complications, providing anatomic information to identify the cause of surgical failure, and selecting appropriate medical or surgical management.

Gastric outlet obstruction secondary to paraesophageal herniation of gastric antrum after laparoscopic fundoplication

The most common causes of acute gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) are duodenal and type 3 gastric ulcers. However, mechanical or functional causes may also lead to this pathology. Acute GOO is characterized by delayed gastric emptying, anorexia, or nausea accompanied by vomiting. Herein we report a 56-year-old man diagnosed with GOO secondary to paraesophageal hiatal herniation of gastric antrum after laparoscopic fundoplication. Because of the rarity of this disease, common gastrointestinal complaints may mislead the emergency physician to diagnose a nonsurgical gastrointestinal disease if a detailed history and physical examinations are not obtained.

Laparoscopic repair for failed antireflux procedures

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive procedures have become common, and more reoperations for failed antireflux procedures are performed laparoscopically. We wanted to study the outcomes of laparoscopic reoperations for reflux.

METHODS

Medical records of all patients who underwent reoperation without esophageal resection after previous antireflux procedures between January 2000 and October 2012 were reviewed.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients were included in this report: 56 (77%) women and 19 (23%) men. Median age was 58 years. The previous operation was laparoscopic antireflux procedures in 65 (87%) patients. The median interval between the last antireflux procedure and laparoscopic reoperation was 42 months. The median body mass index (BMI) was 28.7. All patients were symptomatic. Intraoperative findings included recurrent hiatal hernia in 47 (63%) patients, incompetent fundoplication in 14 (19%) patients, tight fundoplication in 8 (11%) patients, and tight crura in 2 (3%) patients. Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication was performed in 57 (76%) patients, partial posterior fundoplication was performed in 12 (16%) patients, partial anterior fundoplication was performed in 3 (4%) patients, removal of crural stitches was performed in 2 patients, and a combination of partial posterior fundoplication and removal of crural stiches was performed in 1 patient. Complications occurred in 13 (15%) patients. Improvement in symptoms was observed in 70 (93%) patients in early postoperative follow-up and in 59 (78%) patients in long-term follow-up. Functional results were classified as excellent in 59 (78%) patients, good in 6 (7%) patients, fair in 7 (8%) patients, and poor in 3 (4%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic reoperation for failed antireflux operations is a complex procedure, but it is safe and effective in selected patients. Reoperation after a failed antireflux repair results in excellent or good functional status in a majority of patients, but these results may deteriorate over time.

DYSPHAGIA AFTER LAPAROSCOPIC TOTAL FUNDOPLICATION: anterior or posterior gastric wall fundoplication?

ContextThe occurrence of severe dysphagia after laparoscopic total fundoplication is currently an important factor associated with loss of quality of life in patients undergoing this modality of treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease.ObjectivesCompare the incidence and evaluate the causes of severe postoperative dysphagia in patients undergoing laparoscopic total fundoplication (LTF) without short gastric vessels division, using the anterior gastric wall (Rossetti LTF) or anterior and posterior gastric walls (Nissen LTF).MethodsAnalysis of the data of 289 patients submitted to LTF without short gastric vessels division from January 2004 to January 2012, with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. Patients were divided in Group 1 (Rossetti LTF – n = 160) and Group 2 (Nissen LTF – n = 129).ResultsThe overall incidence of severe postoperative dysphagia was 3.11% (4.37% in group 1 and 1.55% in group 2; P = 0.169). The need for surgical treatment of dysphagia was 2.5% in group 1 and 0.78% in group 2 (= 0.264). Distortions of the fundoplication were identified as possible causes of the dysphagia in all patients taken to redo fundoplication after Rossetti LTF. No wrap distortion was seen in redo fundoplication after Nissen LTF.ConclusionsThe overall incidence of severe postoperative dysphagia did not differ on the reported techniques. Only Rossetti LTF was associated with structural distortion of the fundoplication that could justify the dysphagia.

Laparoscopic revision of failed antireflux surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic antireflux surgery is an accepted treatment for persistent gastroesophageal reflux but about 4% of patients will eventually require revision surgery.

METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Collaboration, Medline, and EMBASE databases, augmented by Google Scholar and PubMed related articles from January 1, 1990, to November 22, 2010. Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting on 930 surgeries.

RESULTS

The mean surgical duration was 166 minutes and conversion to open revision fundoplication was required in 7% of cases. Complications were reported in 14% of cases and the mean length of stay varied between 1.2 and 6 days. A good to excellent result was reported for 84% of surgeries and 5% of patients required a further revisional procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic revision antireflux surgery appears to be feasible and safe, but subject to somewhat greater risk of conversion, higher morbidity, longer hospital stay, and poorer outcomes than primary laparoscopic fundoplication.

Reoperative antireflux surgery for dysphagia

BACKGROUND

Troublesome dysphagia is a common indication for redo antireflux surgery (Re-ARS). This study is aimed to analyze the efficacy of Re-ARS in resolving dysphagia and to identify risk factors for persistent or new-onset dysphagia after Re-ARS.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained database was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients after Re-ARS. Dysphagia severity was graded on a scale of 0 to 3 before and after Re-ARS based on responses to a standardized questionnaire. Patients reporting grade 2 or 3 symptoms were considered to have significant dysphagia. Satisfaction was graded using a 10-point analog scale.

RESULTS

Between December 2003 and July 2008, 106 patients underwent Re-ARS. Significant preoperative dysphagia was reported by 54 patients, and impaired esophageal motility was noted in 31 patients. Remedial surgery included redo fundoplication (n = 87), Collis gastroplasty with redo fundoplication (n = 16), and takedown of the fundoplication or hiatal closure alone (n = 3). At least 1 year follow-up period (mean 21.8 months) was available for 92 patients. For patients with significant preoperative dysphagia (n = 46), the mean symptom score declined from 2.35 to 0.78 (p < 0.0001). Persistent dysphagia was reported by 13 patients and new-onset dysphagia by 4 patients. No patients reported grade 3 dysphagia after Re-ARS. Dilations were used to treat 11 patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified Collis gastroplasty (p = 0.03; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 5.74) and preoperative dysphagia (p = 0.01; adjusted OR, 6.80) as risk factors for significant postoperative dysphagia. The overall satisfaction score was 8.3, but certain subsets had significantly lower satisfaction scores. These subsets included patients with esophageal dysmotility (7.1; p = 0.04), patients who required Collis gastroplasty (7.0; p = 0.09), and patients with esophageal dysmotility who required Collis gastroplasty (5.0; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Although dysphagia is a common symptom among patients requiring Re-ARS, intervention provides a significant benefit. Patients with preoperative dysphagia, especially those requiring Collis gastroplasty, are at increased risk for persistent dysphagia and decreased satisfaction after Re-ARS.