Laparoscopic anterior 90 degree fundoplication for reflux or large hiatus hernia

Laparoscopic large hiatus hernia repair with mesh reinforcement versus suture cruroplasty alone: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To compare the difference in outcomes in laparoscopic large hiatus hernia (LHH) repair using suture-based and mesh-based repair techniques.

METHODS

A systematic search of articles was conducted in PubMed, Medline and Embase using the PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing recurrences and reoperations in those patients with large hiatal hernia repair (> 30% stomach in the chest, > 5 cm hiatal defect, hiatal surface area > 10 cm²) who had mesh vs no mesh were assessed quantitatively. The impact of mesh on significant intraoperative/postoperative surgical complications was qualitatively assessed.

RESULTS

Pooled data included six randomized controlled trials and thirteen observational studies with 1670 patients (824 with no mesh, 846 with mesh). There was a significant reduction in the total recurrence rate with mesh (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.25-0.80, p = 0.007). Mesh use did not cause significant reduction in recurrences > 2 cm (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.52-1.67, p = 0.83) or in reoperation rates (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39-1.07, p = 0.09). None of the specific meshes assessed were found to be superior in the reduction of recurrence or reoperation rates. Cases of mesh erosion with eventual foregut resection were noted and were associated with synthetic meshes only.

CONCLUSION

Mesh reinforcement seemed protective against total recurrence in LHH although this has to be interpreted with caution given the level of heterogeneity introduced by the inclusion of observational studies in the analysis. There was no significant reduction in large recurrences (> 2 cm) or reoperation rate. If the synthetic mesh is to be used patients need to be informed of the risk of mesh erosion.

Large hiatus hernia: time for a paradigm shift?

Background

Laparoscopic large hiatal hernia (LHH) repair remains a challenge despite three decades of ongoing attempts at improving surgical outcome. Its rarity and complexity, coupled with suboptimal initial approach that is usually best suited for small symptomatic herniae have contributed to unacceptable higher failure rates.

Results

We have therefore undertaken a systematic appraisal of LHH with a view to clear out our misunderstandings of this entity and to address dogmatic practices that may have contributed to poor outcomes.

Conclusions

First, we propose strict criteria to define nomenclature in LHH and discuss ways of subcategorising them. Next, we discuss preoperative workup strategies, paying particular attention to any relevant often atypical symptoms, indications for surgery, timing of surgery, role of surgery in the elderly and emphasizing the key role of a preoperative CT imaging in evaluating the mediastinum. Some key dissection methods are then discussed with respect to approach to the mediastinal sac, techniques to avoid/deal with pleural breach and rationale to avoid Collis gastroplasty. The issues pertaining to the repair phase are also discussed by evaluating the merits of the cruroplasty, fundoplication types and gastropexy. We end up debating the role of mesh reinforcement and assess the evidence with regards to recurrence, reoperation rate, complications, esophageal dilatation, delayed gastric emptying and mortality. Lastly, we propose a rationale for routine postoperative investigations.

Laparoscopic Anterior Partial Fundoplication is Comparable With Nissen Fundoplication for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) has been the gold standard for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but the side effects of dysphagia and bloating have lead to interest in partial fundoplication as an alternative.

AIM

To compare the symptomatic and objective parameters after LNF and laparoscopic anterior partial fundoplication (LAPF) in patients with GERD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study was conducted in the Division of Minimal Access Surgery, Maulana Azad Medical College from June 2008 to October 2016. Patients with GERD with high score on 24-hour pH monitoring were selected for surgery (LAPF) and were compared with our historical control of 25 patients who underwent LNF. The preoperative and postoperative symptom score and objective parameters were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 50 GERD patients, 20 patients underwent surgery (LAPF) and these were compared with 25 patients who underwent LNF. Demester score, modified Visick grade decreased from 4.12, 3.23 in LNF; 4.35, 3.35 in LAPF to 0, 1 in both groups. There was significant and similar increase in lower esophageal sphincter (LES) length, intra-abdominal LES length, LES pressure. The 24-h pH) decreased from 10.18% and 8.08% to 0.85% and 1.09% in LNF and LAPF, respectively. At 1 year and 5 years of follow-up, symptom scores, manometric analysis, and pH metry evaluation remained to be improved in both the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LAPF is as effective as LNF for GERD, with less dysphagia.

Laparoscopic anterior hemifundoplication and hiatoplasty for the treatment of upside-down stomach: mid- and long-term results after 40 patients

BACKGROUND

Treatment of type 4 hiatal hernia using a minimally invasive approach is challenging and requires good familiarity with this technique.

METHODS

From October 1992 to August 2010, 40 patients with a median age of 68 years underwent laparoscopic anterior hemifundoplication surgery for upside-down stomach and were included in our prospective study. The median symptoms duration was 5 years. The leading clinical symptoms were postprandial, epigastric, or retrosternal pain (80%), heartburn (78%), regurgitation (80%), dysphagia (53%), and anemia (48%). Preoperative evaluation included blood test, chest X-ray, upper endoscopy, and barium swallow. In some patients an esophageal 24-h pH study and esophageal manometry were performed. The median follow-up was 46 months using a standardized questionnaire, including Smiley score, modified Visick score, gastrointestinal quality-of-life index (GQLI), and specific reflux symptoms score.

RESULTS

Surgery was finished laparoscopically in 39 patients (97%). One patient had to be converted to an open procedure because of severe adhesions. Mesh hiatoplasty had to be performed in one patient due to a large hiatal defect. Median operative time was 160 min (range=90-275) and median blood loss was 5 ml (range=0-300). Seven patients (18%) presented with acute symptoms. Intraoperative technical complications occurred in four patients (10%) and nontechnical complications in two cases (5%). Median postoperative hospital stay was 5 days (range=2-17). Postoperative complications occurred in two patients (5%): one pleural effusion and one surgical emphysema. There was no mortality or symptomatic recurrence. All scores showed significant improvement and patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic treatment of type 4 hiatal hernia is safe. With respect to the quality of life, anterior hemifundoplication is highly effective.

Learning curve for laparoscopic repair of very large hiatal hernia

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic repair of a large hiatal hernia is technically challenging. A significant learning curve likely exists that has not been studied to date.

METHODS

Since 1992, the authors have prospectively collected data for all patients undergoing laparoscopic repair of a very large hiatal hernia (50% or more of the stomach within the chest). Follow-up evaluation was performed after 3 months, then yearly. Visual analog scores were used to assess heartburn and dysphagia. Patients were grouped according to institutional and individual surgeons' experience to determine the impact of any learning curve. The outcome for procedures performed by consultant surgeons was compared with that for trainees.

RESULTS

From 1992 to 2008, 415 patients with a 1-year minimum follow-up period were studied. Institutional and individual experience had a significant influence on operation time, conversion to open surgery, and length of hospital stay. However, except for heartburn scores during a 3-month follow-up evaluation of institutional experience (p=0.03), clinical outcomes were not influenced by either an institutional or individual learning curve. Furthermore, in general terms, whether the procedure was performed by a consultant or a supervised trainee had little effect on outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Institutional and individual learning curves had no significant influence on clinical outcomes, although improved experience was reflected in improved operation time, conversion rate, and hospital stay. These outcomes improved over the first 50 institutional cases, and the outcomes for individual surgeons improved for up to 40 cases.