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

The clinical utility of multidisciplinary team meetings for patients with complex benign upper gastrointestinal conditions

Patients with benign upper gastrointestinal (UGI) conditions such as achalasia, gastroparesis and refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease often suffer from debilitating symptoms. These conditions can be complex and challenging to diagnose and treat, making them well suited for discussion within a multidisciplinary meeting (MDM). There is, however, a paucity of data describing the value of a benign UGI MDM. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of our unit's benign UGI MDM service and its outcomes. This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data for all consecutive patients reviewed in the monthly benign UGI MDM between July 2021 and February 2024. The primary outcome was the incidence that MDM review changed clinical treatment. Secondary outcomes included change in diagnosis, additional investigations and referrals to subspecialists. A total of 104 patients met inclusion criteria. A total of 73 (70.2%) patients had a change in their overall management following MDM review; 25 (24.0%), 31 (29.8%) and 48 (46.2%) patients had changes in pharmacological, endoscopic and surgical interventions respectively. Most changes in pharmacological and endoscopic intervention involved treatment escalation, whereas most changes in surgical intervention involved treatment de-escalation. A total of 84 (80.8%) patients had a documented diagnosis post-MDM with 44 (42.3%) having a change in their pre-MDM diagnosis. 50 (48.1%) patients had additional investigation/s requested and 49 (47.1%) had additional referral pathway/s recommended. Over two thirds of patients had at least one aspect of their management plan changed following MDM review. These changes occurred across pharmacological, endoscopic, and surgical interventions.

Robotic versus laparoscopic revision to Toupet fundoplication for failed Nissen fundoplication: a single-center experience

Nissen fundoplication (NF) is a common surgical procedure to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease; however, a subset of patients may continue to experience symptoms or develop symptom recurrence despite a successful procedure. This study aims to compare laparoscopic and robotic approaches for treating failed NF and evaluate the outcomes after converting to Toupet fundoplication (TF). We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic revision to TF for failed NF between 2016 and 2023. The data collected included demographics, pre-operative workup, and peri- and post-operative outcomes. Symptom analysis and anti-reflux medication usage were collected using a patient questionnaire. Failed fundoplication was defined as the need for an additional operation due to unresolved GERD symptoms or the emergence of a new issue. Eighty-eight patients (56 laparoscopic, 32 robotic) were included. Mean operative time was 148.71 ± 53.64 min for the total cohort and was significantly longer in the robotic group (RG) 167.43 min vs 138.01 min in the Laparoscopic group (LG) (p value = 0.012). The LG had a length of hospital stay of 2.16 ± 1.69 days vs RG 2.21 ± 1.28 days (p value = 0.867). The LG had a higher number of early readmissions (5.4%, p value = 0.629) and both the LG and the RG had 1 patient that required an early reintervention. Symptoms of dysphagia and reflux decreased in both groups at last follow-up, but the reduction in PPI use was not significant. Surgical revision to TF for failed NF provides significant symptom improvement with low rates of complications and recurrences. Our study shows that both approaches are safe and feasible and have comparable surgical and symptom outcomes.

The impact of obesity on gastroesophageal reflux disease recurrence following re-operative anti-reflux surgery

INTRODUCTION

Obese patients represent a large proportion of patients experiencing recurrent reflux and re-operations after initial anti-reflux surgery. However, there is a limited data describing the impact of obesity on GERD recurrence following re-operative procedures.

METHODS

A review of patients who underwent re-operative anti-reflux surgery (Re-ARS) between 2012 and 2023. Peri-operative characteristics and post-operative Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL) scores were compared across the three BMI categories: (BMI < 25 kg/m2, 25 ≤ BMI > 30 kg/m2, and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) over 12 IQR (9-14.9) months follow-up. Impedance planimetry measurements were included when it was utilized intraoperatively.

RESULTS

Of 718 patients who underwent robotic ARS, 84 patients (11.6%) underwent Re-ARS, of which 29.7% had a BMI < 25 kg/m2, 35.7% were ≤ 25 BMI < 30 kg/m2, and 34.5% had a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2. The lower esophageal sphincter distensibility decreased similarly between groups with no differences in post-induction [3.2 ± 2 vs 4.5 ± 3.1 vs 3.9 ± 2.5 mm2/mmHg, p = 0.44] or post-fundoplication values [1 ± 0.6 vs 1.3 ± 0.7 vs 1.2 ± 0.6 mm2/mmHg, p = 0.46]. There was a significant improvement in GERD-HRQL scores postoperatively compared to preoperative levels across the three BMI classes (BMI < 25 kg/m2: pre 17 IQR (12-22), post 7.5 (1.5-15), p = 0.04 vs ≤ 25 BMI < 30 kg/m2: pre 26 IQR (10-34), post 8 IQR (0-17), p < 0.01 vs BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2: pre 44 IQR (26-51), post 5 IQR (3.5-14.5), p < 0.001) during 12 IQR (9-14.9) months follow-up. The rates of hiatal hernia recurrence on barium swallow [5.2 vs 15.7 vs 13.7%, p = 0.32] during 7 IQR (5.2-9.2) months follow-up, and endoscopy [13.3 vs 16.6 vs 7.1%, p = 0.74] during 11.8 (IQR 5.6-17.1) months follow-up period were also similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

GERD-HRQL scores in obese patients are expected to improve similarly compared to non-obese patients. Indicating that Re-ARS may be appropriate for patients across a range of BMIs.

Endoscopic assessment of failed fundoplications differs between endoscopists

BACKGROUND

Despite excellent long-term outcomes, a small proportion of patients who undergo fundoplication with hiatal hernia repair (laparoscopic antireflux surgery [ARS]) for treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) may require reoperation. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) assessment in patients presenting with symptom recurrence plays a critical role in surgical planning of redo-ARS by confirming failure of the fundoplication and revealing the pattern of failure. We aimed to compare the findings documented by external endoscopists (i.e., outside physicians) to those documented by internal endoscopists (i.e., operating foregut or thoracic surgeons) before redo-ARS.

METHODS

After IRB approval, we conducted a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent redo-ARS at a tertiary surgical center between November 2016 and March 2023. Patients with both external and internal EGD reports were included, and findings from the two reports were compared.

RESULTS

Of 197 patients who underwent redo-ARS, both preoperative EGD reports were available for 181 (136 [75.1%] women; median age, 61 years [IQR 53-69]; median BMI, 27.9 kg/m2 [IQR 24.9-31.3]). The median time between primary and redo-ARS was 89 months (IQR 38-153), and the median time between external and internal endoscopic evaluation was 5 months (IQR 2-12). Only 38.9% of external reports mentioned a prior fundoplication. Compared to the operating surgeons, external physicians reported a significantly lower proportion of Barrett's esophagus (52.4%, p < .001), slipped fundoplications (28.8%, p < .001), paraesophageal hernias (20.5%, p < .001), disrupted fundoplications (20%, p < .001), intrathoracic fundoplications (0%, p < .001), and twisted fundoplications (0%, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

External endoscopists' reports of failed fundoplications are often incomplete and lack relevant details. Discrepancies between nonsurgical endoscopists and experienced surgeons are likely explained by a lack of training and experience to discern and document fundoplication changes accurately. To reduce this gap, we strongly recommend the adoption of standard definitions describing post-fundoplication endoscopic changes and the inclusion of relevant training within educational programs.

PROsthetic MEsh Reinforcement in elective minimally invasive paraesophageal hernia repair (PROMER): an international survey

The optimal treatment for paraesophageal hiatus hernia (PEH) is controversial. While crural buttressing with mesh shows promises in reducing recurrences, the decision to use mesh during minimally invasive PEH repair is largely subjective. Due to these uncertainties, we conducted a survey to examine current clinical practices among surgeons and to assess which are the most important determinants in the decision-making process for mesh placement. Thirty-five multiple-choice Google Form-based survey on work-up, surgical techniques, and issues are considered in the decision-making process for mesh augmentation during minimally invasive PEH repair. Responses were graded on a 5-point Likert scale and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Consensus was defined as > 70% of participants agreed (agree or strongly agree) on a specific statement. Overall, 292 surgeons (86% from Europe) participated in the survey. The median age of participants was 42 years (range 29-69). The median number of PEH procedures was 25/year/center (range 5-400), with 67% of participants coming from high-volume centers (> 20 procedures/year). Consensus on use of mesh was reached for intraoperative findings of large (> 50% of intrathoracic stomach) PEH (74.3%), crural gap with > 4 cm distance between right and left crus (77.1%), and/or crural atrophy with < 0.5 cm thickness of one or both pillars (73%), and for redo surgery (71.9%). Further, consensus was reached in defining recurrence as a combination of refractory symptoms and anatomical/radiological evidence of > 2 cm hernia. This survey shows that large PEH, wide crural transverse diameter, fragile crura, and redo surgery are the most influential issues driving the decision for mesh-reinforced cruroplasty.

Does crural repair with biosynthetic mesh improve outcomes of revisional surgery for recurrent hiatal hernia?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic revisional surgery for recurrent hiatal hernia (HH) is technically demanding. Re-recurrences are common and esophageal hiatus mesh reinforcement might improve durability of the repair, thus minimizing the risk of re-herniation.

PURPOSE

Assess safety and effectiveness of simple suture repair (no mesh group) vs. crural augmentation with a biosynthetic absorbable mesh (mesh group) in patients with recurrent HH.

METHODS

Observational retrospective study from September 2012 to December 2022. Only patients undergoing redo surgery for previous failures of hiatal hernia repair were enrolled. Surgical failure was defined as symptomatic recurrent HH with > 2 cm of gastric tissue above the diaphragmatic impression at upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and/or swallow study. Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease Health-Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL) and Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaires were used to assess and preoperative and postoperative symptoms and quality of life.

RESULTS

One hundred four patients were included. Overall, 60 patients (57.7%) underwent mesh-reinforced cruroplasty, whereas 44 (42.3%) underwent simple suture cruroplasty. Mesh and no mesh groups had similar baseline demographics, symptoms, prevalence of esophagitis and Barrett's esophagus, and HH size. A composite crural repair was most commonly performed in the mesh group (38.3% vs. 20.5%; p = 0.07). In addition to cruroplasty, most patients (91%) underwent a Toupet fundoplication. The 90-day postoperative complication rate was 8.6%, and there was no mortality. Recurrent HH was diagnosed in 21 patients (20.2%) with a clinical trend toward reduced incidence in the mesh group (16.7% vs. 25%; p = 0.06). Compared to baseline, there was a statistically significant improvement of median GERD-HRQL score (p < 0.01) and all SF-36 items (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic revisional surgery for recurrent HH is safe and effective. Selective use of biosynthetic mesh may protect from early recurrence and has the potential to reduce re-herniation in the long-term.

Long-term results after laparoscopic revision fundoplication: a retrospective, single-center analysis in 194 patients with recurrent hiatal hernia

BACKGROUND

After laparoscopic fundoplication, 10-20% of patients experience symptom recurrence-often due to resurgence of the hiatal hernia. The standard surgical treatment for such cases remains laparoscopic revision fundoplication. However, there is little data on the time frame and anatomic patterns of failed fundoplications. Additionally, few large studies exist on the long-term efficacy and safety of laparoscopic revision fundoplication.

METHODS

In a single-center, retrospective analysis of 194 consecutive revision fundoplications for recurrent reflux disease due to hiatal hernia, we collected data on time to failure and patterns of failure of the primary operation, as well as on the efficacy and safety of the revision.

RESULTS

The median time to failure of the primary fundoplication was 3 years. Most hiatal defects were smaller than 5 cm and located anteriorly or concentric around the esophagus. Laparoscopic redo fundoplication was technically successful in all cases. The short-term complication rate was 9%, mainly dysphagia requiring endoscopic intervention. At a mean follow-up of 4.7 years, 77% of patients were symptom-free, 14% required daily PPI, and 9% underwent secondary revision. Cumulative failure rates were 9%, 23%, and 31% at 1, 5, and 10 years.

CONCLUSION

The majority of failed fundoplications occur within 3 years of primary surgery, with most patients exhibiting anterior or concentric defects. For these patients, laparoscopic revision fundoplication is a safe procedure with a low rate of short-term complications and satisfactory long-term results.

Current Status of Anti-Reflux Surgery as a Treatment for GERD

Anti-reflux surgery (ARS) is an efficient treatment option for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Despite growing evidence of the efficacy and safety of ARS, medications including proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) remain the most commonly administered treatments for GERD. Meanwhile, ARS can be an effective treatment option for patients who need medications continuously or for those who are refractory to PPI treatment, if proper candidates are selected. However, in practice, ARS is often regarded as a last resort for patients who are unresponsive to PPIs. Accumulating ARS-related studies indicate that surgery is equivalent to or better than medical treatment for controlling typical and atypical GERD symptoms. Furthermore, because of overall reduced medication expenses, ARS may be more cost-effective than PPI. Patients are selected for ARS based on endoscopic findings, esophageal acid exposure time, and PPI responsiveness. Although there is limited evidence, ARS may be expanded to include patients with normal acid exposure, such as those with reflux hypersensitivity. Additionally, other factors such as age, body mass index, and comorbidities are known to affect ARS outcomes; and such factors should be considered. Nissen fundoplication or partial fundoplication including Dor fundoplication and Toupet fundoplication can be chosen, depending on whether the patient prioritizes symptom improvement or minimizing postoperative symptoms such as dysphagia. Furthermore, efforts to reduce and manage postoperative complications and create awareness of the long-term efficacy and safety of the ARS are recommended, as well as adequate training programs for new surgeons.

Robotic revision surgery after failed Nissen anti-reflux surgery: a single center experience and a literature review

BACKGROUND

The gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) worldwide prevalence is increasing maybe due to population aging and the obesity epidemic. Nissen fundoplication is the most common surgical procedure for GERD with a failure rate of approximately 20% which might require a redo surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic redo procedures after anti-reflux surgery failure including a narrative review.

METHODS

We reviewed our 15-year experience from 2005 to 2020 including 317 procedures, 306 for primary, and 11 for revisional surgery.

RESULTS

Patients included in the redo series underwent primary Nissen fundoplication with a mean age of 57.6 years (range, 43-71). All procedures were minimally invasive and no conversion to open surgery was registered. The meshes were used in five (45.45%) patients. The mean operative time was 147 min (range, 110-225) and the mean hospital stay was 3.2 days (range, 2-7). At a mean follow-up of 78 months (range, 18-192), one patient suffered for persistent dysphagia and one for delayed gastric emptying. We had two (18.19%) Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa complications, consisting of postoperative pneumothoraxes treated with chest drainage.

CONCLUSION

Redo anti-reflux surgery is indicated in selected patients and the robotic approach is safe when it is performed in specialized centers, considering its surgical technical difficulty.

Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in symptomatic patients following fundoplication failure: a meta-analysis

Revisional surgery may be required in a subset of patients who remain symptomatic despite undergoing laparoscopic fundoplication (LF) for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). While revisional LF (RLF) is feasible in these patients, laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) may serve as an alternative, although its efficacy and safety remains unknown. This study aimed to determine the outcomes of LRYGB in symptomatic patients following failed LF for GERD. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed databases were systematically searched for studies reporting LRYGB outcomes in symptomatic adults despite undergoing LF for GERD. Postoperative symptom resolution, recurrence of heartburn and dysphagia, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use, and body mass index (BMI) reduction were assessed to determine LRYGB efficacy. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were used to evaluate LRYGB safety. Twenty-two studies with 1523 patients were included. Pooled rates of symptom resolution, recurrence of heartburn and dysphagia, PPI use, morbidity, and mortality were 71.6% (95% CI 59.4-86.4), 15.6% (8.9-27.3), 20.7% (12.5-34.3), 29.6% (18.8-46.5), 39.5% (29.9-52.3), and 2.2% (1.2-4.0), respectively, following LRYGB. Similar rates were observed after RLF. However, BMI reduction was significantly greater after LRYGB compared with RLF (mean difference 6.1 kg/m², 4.8-7.4; p < 0.0001). LRYGB resulted in symptom relief in a majority of patients, and proved comparable to RLF regarding symptom recurrence and PPI use. Morbidity and mortality following LRYGB also did not differ from RLF. However, LRYGB was associated with considerably greater weight loss relative to RLF. Therefore, LRYGB is efficacious and an acceptable revisional procedure in symptomatic GERD patients who have previously undergone LF.

Laparoscopic fundoplication performed in community hospital settings: A protocol for systematic review

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic fundoplication (LF) is well-established as the surgical intervention of choice for management of refactory gastro-esophageal reflux disease. Much of its success lies in the reported benefits in symptom control outlined by the postoperative patient. It is unclear whether patient-reported outcomes differ according to the institution type providing care. This review aimed to address this knowledge gap by reviewing the available evidence examining patient-reported outcomes of LF in non-metropolitan centers.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate patient-reported outcomes of LF performed in regional or community-based hospitals.

DATA SOURCES

Four electronic databases, and citations of relevant articles.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Only studies that separately reported patient-reported outcomes of LF performed in regional or community hospitals were included; papers deemed to be unclear about the type of facility in which LF surgeries were performed, or in which data from LF surgeries performed in regional/community hospitals was combined with data from major metropolitan hospitals, were excluded.

STUDY APPRAISAL

Only studies that were graded as fair or good using Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-sectional studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. Seven studies were then eligible for inclusion, all of which were observational cohort studies with 6 of the studies reporting on a single intervention arm.

RESULTS

Seven observational cohort studies were included in the review, with a combined total of 1071 patients who underwent LF at non-metropolitan centers. Of these, data was collected for 742 patients, yielding an overall response rate of 69.3%. All 7 studies assessed patients' post-operative outcomes through questionnaires that were based on a modified Likert scale or a similar tool. Overall patient satisfaction was high (86%) and a significant majority of patients stated they would recommend the procedure to others (93.3%). Post-operative prevalence of reflux and dysphagia compared favorably to rates generally reported in the literature (11.9% and 17.6% respectively). Further research is required to ascertain the safety of performing these procedures in non-metropolitan hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests that patient-reported outcomes are favorable for patients undergoing LF in community settings, and are broadly comparable to those undergoing LF in tertiary-level centers.