Laparoscopic redo anti-reflux surgery: Case-series of different presentations, varied management and their outcomes

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic redo antireflux surgery in children: A cost-effectiveness study

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted redo fundoplication has some advantages compared to the laparoscopic approach in adults, although to date there are no studies in children.

METHODS

A retrospective case-control study was performed among consecutive children who underwent redo antireflux surgery between 2004 and 2020, divided into two groups: LAF group (laparoscopic redo-fundoplication) and RAF group (robotic-assisted redo-fundoplication). Demographics, clinical, intraoperative, postoperative and economic data were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 24 patients were included (10 LAF group; 14 RAF group) without demographic or clinical differences. The RAF group presented lower intraoperative blood loss (52 ± 19 vs. 145 ± 69 mL; p < 0.021), shorter surgery time (135 ± 39 vs. 179 ± 68 min; p = 0.009) and shorter length of hospital stay (median 3 days [2-4] vs. 5 days [3-7]; p = 0.002). The RAF group presented a higher rate of symptom improvement (85.7% vs. 60%; p = 0.192) and lower overall associated economic costs (25 800$ vs. 45 500$; p = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted redo antireflux surgery may offer several benefits over the laparoscopic approach. Prospective studies are still needed.

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 surgery after laparoscopic fundoplication]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the results of redo surgeries after previous laparoscopic fundoplication.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis included 37 repeated anti-reflux surgeries. Control group consisted of 38 patients after the first anti-reflux surgery performed on the same clinical base. The causes of unsatisfactory results of the first operations were studied. Intraoperative data, immediate and long-term results of surgical treatment were compared in both groups. Quality of life in both groups was studied before surgery and in long-term period using GIQLI questionnaire.

RESULTS

The most common cause of recurrent reflux was a hernia recurrence combined with slipping or destruction of the fundoplication cuff. Dysphagia was usually a result of compression of the esophagus by tightly sutured diaphragmatic crura and recurrent paraesophageal hernia. The main group was characterized by significantly greater surgery time, hospital-stay, incidence of intraoperative and postoperative complications. However, a more significant improvement of quality of life (∆GIQLI) was observed in the main group due to the low QOL index before redo surgery.

CONCLUSION

Redo surgeries are effective and safe procedures. These operations significantly improve QOL in long-term period despite certain technical difficulties. Repeated surgeries for dysphagia accounted for 2%, for recurrent reflux - 6%. Persistent postoperative dysphagia is usually associated with diaphragm repair rather fundoplication cuff. Reflux recurrence is often caused by cuff slippage and recurrent hernia.

A retrospective multicenter analysis on redo-laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery: conservative or conversion fundoplication?

BACKGROUND

Nearly 20% of patients who undergo hiatal hernia (HH) repair and anti-reflux surgery (ARS) report recurrent HH at long-term follow-up and may be candidates for redo surgery. Current literature on redo-ARS has limitations due to small sample sizes or single center experiences. This type of redo surgery is challenging due to rare but severe complications. Furthermore, the optimal technique for redo-ARS remains debatable. The purpose of the current multicenter study was to review the outcomes of redo-fundoplication and to identify the best ARS repair technique for recurrent HH and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS

Data on 975 consecutive patients undergoing hiatal hernia and GERD repair were retrospectively collected in five European high-volume centers. Patient data included demographics, BMI, techniques of the first and redo surgeries (mesh/type of ARS), perioperative morbidity, perioperative complications, duration of hospitalization, time to recurrence, and follow-up. We analyzed the independent risk factors associated with recurrent symptoms and complications during the last ARS. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism^® and R software^®.

RESULTS

Seventy-three (7.49%) patients underwent redo-ARS during the last decade; 71 (98%) of the surgeries were performed using a minimally invasive approach. Forty-two (57.5%) had conversion from Nissen to Toupet. In 17 (23.3%) patients, the initial Nissen fundoplication was conserved. The initial Toupet fundoplication was conserved in 9 (12.3%) patients, and 5 (6.9%) had conversion of Toupet to Nissen. Out of the 73 patients, 10 (13%) underwent more than one redo-ARS. At 8.5 (1-107) months of follow-up, patients who underwent reoperation with Toupet ARS were less symptomatic during the postoperative period compared to those who underwent Nissen fundoplication (p = 0.005, OR 0.038). Patients undergoing mesh repair during the redo-fundoplication (21%) were less symptomatic during the postoperative period (p = 0.020, OR 0.010). The overall rate of complications (Clavien-Dindo classification) after redo surgery was 11%. Multivariate analysis showed that the open approach (p = 0.036, OR 1.721), drain placement (p = 0.0388, OR 9.308), recurrence of dysphagia (p = 0.049, OR 8.411), and patient age (p = 0.0619, OR 1.111) were independent risk factors for complications during the last ARS.

CONCLUSIONS

Failure of ARS rarely occurs in the hands of experienced surgeons. Redo-ARS is feasible using a minimally invasive approach. According to our study, in terms of recurrence of symptoms, Toupet fundoplication is a superior ARS technique compared to Nissen for redo-fundoplication. Therefore, Toupet fundoplication should be considered in redo interventions for patients who initially underwent ARS with Nissen fundoplication. Furthermore, mesh repair in reoperations has a positive impact on reducing the recurrence of symptoms postoperatively.

Redo Surgery after Failure of Antireflux Surgery

Surgery for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has a satisfactory outcome for most patients; however, sometimes redo surgery is required. The Outcome and morbidity of a redo are suggested to be less successful than those of primary surgery. The aim of this study was to describe our experience, long-term results, and complications in redo surgery. From 2000 to 2016, 765 patients were operated on for GERD at our hospital. A retrospective analysis of 56 patients (7.3%) who underwent redo surgery was conducted. Large symptomatic recurrent hiatal hernia (50%) and dysphagia (28.6%) were the most frequent indications for redo. An open approach was chosen in 64.5 per cent of patients. Intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were 18 per cent and 14.3 per cent, respectively. Mortality rate was 1.8 per cent. Symptomatic outcome was successful in 71.3 per cent. Patients reoperated because of dysphagia and large recurrent hiatal hernia had a significantly higher failure rate (32.3% and 31.2%, respectively; P = 0.001). Complication rate was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group (0% vs 22.2%; P = 0.04). There were no statistical differences between expert and nonexpert surgeons. Laparoscopic approach has increased to 83.3 per cent in the last five years. Symptomatic outcome after redo surgery was less satisfactory than that after primary surgery. Complications were lower if a minimally invasive surgical approach was used.