Revision of failed transoral incisionless fundoplication by subsequent laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication

Transoral incisionless fundoplication for recurrent symptoms after laparoscopic fundoplication

BACKGROUND

Revision of a failed laparoscopic fundoplication carries higher risk of complication and lower chance of success compared to the original surgery. Transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) may be an endoscopic alternative for select GERD patients without need of a moderate/large hiatal hernia repair. The aim of this study was to assess feasibility, efficacy, and safety of TIF 2.0 after failed laparoscopic Nissen or Toupet fundoplication (TIFFF).

METHODS

This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent TIFFF between September 2017 and December 2020 using TIF 2.0 technique (EsophyX Z/Z+) performed by gastroenterologists and surgeons. Patients were included if they had (1) recurrent GERD symptoms, (2) pathologic reflux based upon pH testing or Grade C/D esophagitis or Barrett's esophagus, and (3) hiatal hernia ≤ 2 cm. The primary outcome was improvement in GERD Health-Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL) post-TIFFF. The TIFFF cohort was also compared to a similar surgical re-operative cohort using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Twenty patients underwent TIFFF (median 4.1 years after prior fundoplication) and mean GERD-HRQL score improved from 24.3 ± 22.9 to 14.75 ± 21.6 (p = 0.014); mean Reflux Severity Index (RSI) score improved from 14.1 ± 14.6 to 9.1 ± 8.0 (p = 0.046) with 8/10 (80%) of patients with normal RSI (< 13) post-TIF. Esophagitis healed in 78% of patients. PPI use decreased from 85 to 55% with 8/20 (45%) patients off of PPI. Importantly, mean acid exposure time decreased from 12% ± 17.8 to 0.8% ± 1.1 (p = 0.028) with 9/9 (100%) of patients with normalized pH post-TIF. There were no statistically significant differences in clinical efficacy outcomes between TIFFF and surgical revision, but TIFFF had significantly fewer late adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic rescue with TIF is a safe and efficacious alternative to redo laparoscopic surgery in symptomatic patients with appropriate anatomy and objective evidence of persistent or recurrent reflux.

Hiatal hernia repair with transoral incisionless fundoplication versus Nissen fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease: A retrospective study

Background and study aims  Concomitant hiatal hernia (HH) repair with transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) is a therapeutic option for patients with HH > 2 cm and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Data comparing this approach with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) are lacking. We performed an exploratory analysis to compare these two approaches' adverse events (AEs) and clinical outcomes. Patients and methods  This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study of HH repair followed by LNF versus HH repair followed by TIF in patients with GERD and moderate HH (2-5 cm). AEs were assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Symptoms (heartburn/regurgitation, bloating, and dysphagia) were compared at 6 and 12 months. Results  A total of 125 patients with HH repair with TIF and 70 with HH repair with LNF were compared. There was no difference in rates of discontinuing or decreasing proton pump inhibitor use, dysphagia, esophagitis, disrupted wrap, and HH recurrence between the two groups ( P  > 0.05). The length of hospital stay (1 day vs. 2 days), 30-day readmission rate (0 vs. 4.3 %), early AE rate (0 vs. 18.6 %), and early serious AE rate (0 vs. 4.3 %) favored TIF (all P  < 0.05). The rate of new or worse than baseline bloating was lower in the TIF group at 6 months (13.8 % vs. 30.0 %, P  = 0.009). Conclusions  Concomitant HH repair with TIF is feasible and associated with lower early and serious AEs compared to LNF. Further comparative efficacy studies are warranted.

Endoscopic Treatment of Reflux: A Comprehensive Review

The last decade has seen the rise of multiple novel endoscopic techniques to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease, many of which are efficacious when compared with traditional surgical options and allow relief from long-term dependence on antacid medications. This review will explore the latest endoscopic treatment options for gastroesophageal reflux disease including a description of the technique, review of efficacy and safety, and future directions.

Endoscopic Management of GERD

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has consistently been the most frequently diagnosed gastrointestinal malady in the USA. The mainstay of therapy has traditionally been medical management, including lifestyle and dietary modifications as well as antacid medications. In those patients found to be refractory to medical management or with a contraindication to medications, the next step up has been surgical anti-reflux procedures. Recently, though innovative advancements in therapeutic endoscopy have created numerous options for the endoscopic management of GERD, in this review, we discuss the various endoscopic therapy options, as well as suggested strategies we use to recommend the most appropriate therapy for patients.

The evolution of TIF: transoral incisionless fundoplication

Transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) was introduced in 2006 as a concerted effort to produce a natural orifice procedure for reflux. Since that time, the device, as well as the procedure technique, has evolved. Significant research has been published during each stage of the evolution, and this has led to considerable confusion and a co-mingling of outcomes, which obscures the results of the current device and procedure. This report is intended to review the identified stages and literature associated with each stage to date and to review the current state of treatment outcomes.

Transoral Incisionless Fundoplication

GERD is a spectrum disorder, and treatment should be individualized to the patient's anatomic alterations. Trans-oral incisionless fundoplication (TIF 2.0) is an endoscopic procedure which reduces EGJ distensibility, thereby decreasing tLESRs, and also creates a 3-cm high pressure zone at the distal esophagus in the configuration of a flap valve. As it produces a partial fundoplication with a controlled valve diameter, gas can still escape from the stomach, minimizing the side-effect of gas-bloat. Herein we discuss the rationale, mechanism of action, patient selection, step-by-step procedure, safety and efficacy data, it's use with concomitant laparoscopic hernia repair, and future emerging indications.

[Current aspects of surgical treatment of gastro-esophageal reflux disease]

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is characterized by abnormal reflux of gastric content into the esophagus, pharynx, respiratory tract and oral cavity. In recent years, there has been a significant increase of the incidence of this disease, that significantly aggravates quality of life of the population. The 'gold standard' for treating GERD is anti-secretory therapy with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). However, up to 40% of patients are unresponsive to PPIs even after dose adjustment. Advantages and disadvantages of modern surgical approaches for this pathology are reviewed. Laparoscopic fundoplication including Nissen (360°), Toupet (270°) and Dor procedures (180°) is the most common anti-reflux operation. In addition, new alternative surgical options are also discussed. For example, these are minimally invasive methods such as LINX reflux control system, electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter and transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF). These methods are less aggressive and have less side effects. A comparative assessment of modern methods of surgical treatment of GERD is made.

Salvage Options for Fundoplication Failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) affects millions of people worldwide. Many patients with medically refractory symptoms ultimately undergo antireflux surgery, most often with a laparoscopic fundoplication. Symptoms related to GERD may persist or recur. Revisional surgery is necessary in some patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

A reoperative fundoplication is the most commonly performed salvage procedure for failed fundoplication. Although redo fundoplication has been reported to have increased risk of morbidity compared with primary cases, increasing experience with the minimally invasive approach to reoperative surgery has significantly improved patient outcome with acceptable resolution of reflux symptoms in the majority of patients. Recurrence of reflux symptoms after an initial fundoplication requires a thorough work-up and a thoughtful approach. While reoperative fundoplication is the most common procedure performed, there are other options and the treatment should be tailored to the patient, their history, and the mechanism of fundoplication failure.

Update on Endoscopic Approaches for the Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most commonly encountered gastrointestinal diseases in outpatient clinics. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the cornerstone of the treatment of GERD. However, approximately one-third of patients have suboptimal response to PPIs. The management options in such cases include antireflux surgery or endoscopic antireflux treatments. Antireflux surgery is not popular due to its invasive nature and potential for adverse events. Therefore, minimally invasive endoscopic antireflux therapies are gaining popularity for the management of PPI-dependent and PPI-refractory GERD. These endoscopic therapies include radiofrequency application, endoscopic fundoplication modalities, and mucosal resection techniques. In appropriately selected patients, the response to these endoscopic modalities is encouraging. Unlike surgical fundoplication, endoscopic antireflux therapies are less likely to be associated with complications such as dysphagia and gas-bloat syndrome. On the other hand, antireflux surgery remains the ideal treatment in patients with a large hiatal hernia (laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication), morbid obesity (gastric bypass), and severe reflux esophagitis. Endoscopic treatment modalities bear the potential to narrow the treatment gap between PPIs and antireflux surgery. Long-term follow-up studies and randomized comparison with antireflux surgery are required to provide a clear understanding of the current role of endoscopic modalities in patients with PPI-refractory and PPI-dependent GERD.

Efficacy of Laparoscopic Nissen Fundoplication vs Transoral Incisionless Fundoplication or Proton Pump Inhibitors in Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The effects of transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) and laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) have been compared with those of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or a sham procedure in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but there has been no direct comparison of TIF vs LNF. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the relative efficacies of TIF vs LNF in patients with GERD.

METHODS

We searched publication databases and conference abstracts through May 10, 2017 for randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy of TIF or LNF with that of a sham procedure or PPIs in patients with GERD. We performed a network meta-analysis using Bayesian methods under random-effects multiple treatment comparisons. We assessed ranking probability by surface under the cumulative ranking curve.

RESULTS

Our search identified 7 trials comprising 1128 patients. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve ranking indicated TIF had highest probability of increasing patients' health-related quality of life (0.96), followed by LNF (0.66), a sham procedure (0.35), and PPIs (0.042). LNF had the highest probability of increasing percent time at pH <4 (0.99), followed by PPIs (0.64), TIF (0.32), and the sham procedure (0.05). LNF also had the highest probability of increasing LES pressure (0.78), followed by TIF (0.72) and PPIs (0.01). Patients who underwent the sham procedure had the highest probability for persistent esophagitis (0.74), followed by those receiving TIF (0.69), LNF (0.38), and PPIs (0.19). Meta-regression showed a shorter follow-up time as a significant confounder for the outcome of health-related quality of life in studies of TIF.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and network meta-analysis of trials of patients with GERD, we found LNF to have the greatest ability to improve physiologic parameters of GERD, including increased LES pressure and decreased percent time pH <4. Although TIF produced the largest increase in health-related quality of life, this could be due to the shorter follow-up time of patients treated with TIF vs LNF or PPIs. TIF is a minimally invasive endoscopic procedure, yet based on evaluation of benefits vs risks, we do not recommend it as a long-term alternative to PPI or LNF treatment of GERD.

The Quality of Care for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Improving the quality of healthcare delivery is a cornerstone of modern medical care shared between all stakeholders. However, effectively improving quality requires both an understanding of the tenets of healthcare quality and how they relate to an individual disease process. This is especially important for common diseases, such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), where wide variations in practice exist. The high prevalence of GERD coupled with wide variation in clinical approach results in significant economic burden and poor quality of care. Thus, GERD serves as a useful framework to highlight the opportunities and current challenges of delivering high-quality care. In this article, we identify quality metrics in GERD and the areas in need of research to improve the quality of the management of GERD. Additionally, we suggest strategies for improvement as it relates to the proper diagnostic testing utilization and the decision-making process.

Endoscopic Options for Gastroesophageal Reflux: Where Are We Now and What Does the Future Hold?

Early in the twenty-first century, novel endoscopic techniques were introduced for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease, providing minimally invasive ways to eliminate pharmacologic acid inhibition and avoid the need for anti-reflux surgery. These techniques do not significantly alter the anatomy of the gastroesophageal junction, minimizing short- and long-term adverse effects, such as dysphagia and bloating. After extensive clinical testing, many endoscopic therapies were abandoned due to either lack of durable efficacy or unfavorable safety profile. Today, only four such therapies remain clinically available, each with variable levels of clinical validation and market penetration. This review will provide an assessment of these endoscopic therapies, highlighting their respective strengths and weaknesses and their present and future applicability to patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease.