Long-term clinical evaluation of laparoscopic management of large hiatal hernias.

BACKGROUND: Large hiatal hernias (LHH) account for 5-10% of all hiatal hernias. Surgery of LHH should be associated with low rates of postoperative complications and recurrences, to guarantee a favorable quality of life (QoL). Data on long-term results of laparoscopic repair of LHH are lacking. The objective of our study is to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes of laparoscopic LHH management in a high-volume experienced center. METHODS: Patients who had undergone elective laparoscopic repair of LHH between January 1992 and December 2008 at the Center of Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Italy were included. Preoperative and intraoperative data were collected from patients' charts. Patients were clinically evaluated at long-term postoperative follow-up to assess control of symptoms, degree of satisfaction with surgery, and QoL. RESULTS: At mean follow-up of 240 months (range 168-348), 81 patients were available for clinical evaluation. Severe heartburn was reported by six patients (7.4%), while severe post-prandial epigastric pain by three (3.7%). Recurrent coughing episodes were described by six patients (7.4%), while occasional mild episodes of transient dysphagia by 13 (16%). No gas bloat detected. Proton Pump Inhibitors were taken by 22 patients (27.2%) to control symptoms. The Modified Italian Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health Related Quality of Life (MI-GERD-HRQL) score decreased significantly from 40 to 7 (P<0.0001) postoperatively. Satisfaction was achieved in 76 patients (93.8%) with an average satisfaction index of 8.6 (IQR 8-10). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic LHH repair is effective when performed in a specialized center, with long-lasting significant improvements of symptoms and QoL.

LAPAROSCOPIC ANTIREFLUX SURGERY: WERE OLD QUESTIONS ANSWERED? PARTIAL OR TOTAL FUNDOPLICATION?

Laparoscopic total fundoplication is currently considered the gold standard for the surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Short-term outcomes after laparoscopic total fundoplication are excellent, with fast recovery and minimal perioperative morbidity. The symptom relief and reflux control are achieved in about 80 to 90% of patients 10 years after surgery. However, a small but clinically relevant incidence of postoperative dysphagia and gas-related symptoms is reported. Debate still exists about the best antireflux operation; during the last three decades, the surgical outcome of laparoscopic partial fundoplication (anterior or posterior) were compared to those achieved after a laparoscopic total fundoplication. The laparoscopic partial fundoplication, either anterior (180°) or posterior, should be performed only in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease secondary to scleroderma and impaired esophageal motility, since the laparoscopic total fundoplication would impair esophageal emptying and cause dysphagia.

Laparoscopic antireflux surgery for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease: long-term clinical outcomes.

Persistent symptoms despite adequate Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPI) treatment are described in up to 40% of patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD). The efficacy of Laparoscopic Antireflux Surgery (LARS) in PPI non-responder patients is still unclear. This observational study aims to report the long-term clinical outcomes and predictors of dissatisfaction in a cohort of refractory GERD patients submitted to LARS. Patients with preoperative refractory symptoms and objective GERD evidence submitted to LARS between 2008 and 2016 were included in the study. Primary endpoint was overall satisfaction with the procedure, secondary endpoints were long-term GERD symptom relief and endoscopic findings. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to compare satisfied and dissatisfied patients, in order to identify preoperative predictors of dissatisfaction. A total of 73 refractory GERD patients who underwent LARS were included in the study. At a mean follow-up of 91.2 ± 30.5 months, the satisfaction rate was 86.3%, with a statistically significant reduction in typical and atypical GERD symptoms. Causes of dissatisfaction were severe heartburn (6.8%), gas bloat syndrome (2.8%), and persistent dysphagia (4.1%). Multivariate analysis showed that a number of Total Distal Reflux Episodes (TDRE) > 75 was a predictive factor of long-term dissatisfaction after LARS while a partial response to PPI was a protective factor against dissatisfaction. LARS guarantees a high level of long-term satisfaction for selected refractory GERD patients. An abnormal TDRE at 24 h-multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring and the lack of response to preoperative PPI were predictors of long-term dissatisfaction.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: laparoscopic vs. robot assisted.

There is controversy over the possible advantages of the robotic technology in revisional bariatric surgery. The aim of this study is to report the experience of a high-volume bariatric center on revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with robot-assisted (R-rRYGB) and laparoscopic (L-rRYGB) approaches, with regards to operative outcomes and costs. Patients who underwent R-rRYGB and L-rRYGB between 2008 and 2021 were included. Patients' baseline characteristics and perioperative data were recorded. The primary endpoint was the overall postoperative morbidity. A full economic evaluation was performed. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed on laparoscopic anastomotic leak and reoperation rates. A total of 194 patients were included: 44 (22.7%) L-rRYGB and 150 (77.3%) R-rRYGB. The robotic approach was associated with lower overall complication rate (10% vs. 22.7%, p = 0.038), longer operative time, and a reduced length of stay compared to L-rRYGB. R-rRYGB was more expensive than L-rRYGB (mean difference 2401.1€, p < 0.001). The incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) was 18,906.3€/complication and the incremental cost-utility ratio was 48,022.0€/QALY (quality-adjusted life years), that is below the willingness-to-pay threshold. Decision tree analysis showed that L-rRYGB was the most cost-effective strategy in the base-case scenario; a probability of leak ≥ 13%, or a probability of reoperation ≥ 14% following L-rRYGB, or a 12.7% reduction in robotic costs would be required for R-rRYGB to become the most cost-effective strategy. R-rRYGB was associated with higher costs than L-rRYGB in our base-case scenario. However, it is an acceptable alternative from a cost-effectiveness perspective.

Why pay more for robot in esophageal cancer surgery?

Esophagectomy is the gold standard for the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer. Traditionally, it is performed through a laparotomy and a thoracotomy, and is associated with high rates of postoperative complications and mortality. The advent of robotic surgery has represented a technological evolution in the field of esophageal cancer treatment. Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been progressively widely adopted following the first reports on the safety and feasibility of this procedure in 2004. The robotic approach has better short-term postoperative outcomes than open esophagectomy, without jeopardizing oncologic radicality. The results of the comparison between RAMIE and conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy are less conclusive. This article will focus on the role of RAMIE in the current clinical scenario with particular attention to its possible benefits and perspectives.

Laparoscopic antireflux surgery: were old questions answered? partial or total fundoplication? / Cirurgia laparoscópica antirrefluxo: perguntas antigas foram respondidas? fundoplicatura parcial ou total?

ABSTRACT Laparoscopic total fundoplication is currently considered the gold standard for the surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Short-term outcomes after laparoscopic total fundoplication are excellent, with fast recovery and minimal perioperative morbidity. The symptom relief and reflux control are achieved in about 80 to 90% of patients 10 years after surgery. However, a small but clinically relevant incidence of postoperative dysphagia and gas-related symptoms is reported. Debate still exists about the best antireflux operation; during the last three decades, the surgical outcome of laparoscopic partial fundoplication (anterior or posterior) were compared to those achieved after a laparoscopic total fundoplication. The laparoscopic partial fundoplication, either anterior (180°) or posterior, should be performed only in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease secondary to scleroderma and impaired esophageal motility, since the laparoscopic total fundoplication would impair esophageal emptying and cause dysphagia.

RESUMO A fundoplicatura total laparoscópica é considerada, atualmente, o padrão ouro para o tratamento cirúrgico da doença do refluxo gastroesofágico. Os resultados de curto prazo após a fundoplicatura total laparoscópica são excelentes, com recuperação rápida e morbidade perioperatória mínima. O alívio dos sintomas e o controle do refluxo são alcançados em cerca de 80 a 90% dos pacientes, 10 anos após a cirurgia. No entanto, é relatada uma incidência pequena, mas clinicamente relevante, de disfagia pós-operatória e sintomas relacionados a gases. Ainda existe debate sobre a melhor operação antirrefluxo e, nas últimas três décadas, os resultados cirúrgicos da fundoplicatura parcial laparoscópica (anterior ou posterior) foram comparados aos obtidos após uma fundoplicatura total laparoscópica. A fundoplicatura parcial laparoscópica, seja anterior (180°) ou posterior, deve ser realizada apenas em pacientes com doença do refluxo gastroesofágico secundária a esclerodermia e motilidade esofágica ineficiente, pois uma fundoplicatura total laparoscópica prejudicaria o esvaziamento esofágico e causaria disfagia.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) with side-to-side semi-mechanical anastomosis: analysis of a learning curve.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) reduces mortality and morbidity related to esophageal surgery, but a long learning curve is necessary due to the technical difficulties of thoracoscopy (35 to 119 patients required as reported in literature). Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) with side-to-side semi-mechanical (SM) anastomosis may shorten completion of the learning curve. We present the results of the first 40 RAMIEs performed by a single surgeon with experience in esophageal and minimally invasive surgery. Patients included in this study underwent RAMIE between April 1, 2018 and April 30, 2021. According to the risk-adjusted cumulative sum analysis for postoperative complications, the first 19 patients were compared to the last 21. Pulmonary complications and atrial fibrillation occurred in 2.5% and 5% of cases, respectively. A single case of anastomotic leak in the early group was registered. Thirty-day mortality was 2.5%. R0 resection was obtained in all cases. No anastomotic strictures occurred during the follow-up (median of 20 months). A significant difference between the early group and the late one was observed for median operative time (425 vs 393 min, p = 0.001), estimated intraoperative blood loss (100 vs 50 ml, p = 0.003), Intensive Care Unit stay (days 2 vs 1, p = 0.004), hospital stay (days 13 vs 10, p = 0.007) and number of lymph nodes harvested (17 vs 21, p = 0.020). In conclusion, this study showed RAMIE to be safe and effective even in the early phase of its application. The learning curve resulted shorter than in MIE, with 19 patients needed to gain proficiency in our series.

Robotic "Double Loop" Roux-en-Y gastric bypass reduces the risk of postoperative internal hernias: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Internal herniation (IH) is a potentially serious complication after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). The aim of the study is to evaluate the incidence of IH after robot-assisted RYGB (RA-RYGB) performed with the "Double Loop" technique at our Institution. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of patients submitted to RA-RYGB with the "Double Loop" technique, with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients with complaints of abdominal pain at clinical visits or entering the emergency department were evaluated. Primary outcome was the incidence of IH, defined as the presence of herniated bowel through a mesenteric defect, diagnosed at imaging or at surgical exploration. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients were included: 65 (50.4%) were primary procedures, while 64 (49.6%) were revisional operations after primary restrictive bariatric surgery. Mean age was 47.9 ± 10.2 years, mean weight, and body mass index were, respectively, 105.3 ± 22.6 kg and 39.7 ± 9.6 kg/m2. Postoperative morbidity rate was 7.0%. Mean follow-up was 53.2 ± 22.6 (range 24-94) months. During the follow-up period, a total of 14 (10.8%) patients entered the emergency department: 1 patient had melena, 4 renal colic, 1 acute cholecystitis, 2 gynecologic pathologies, 2 anastomotic ulcers, 1 perforated gastric ulcer, 1 diverticulitis and 2 gastroenteritis. There were no diagnoses of IH. During the follow-up period, no patient experienced recurrence of symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, the robotic approach confirms the low complication rate and absence of IH after "Double Loop" RA-RYGB in a large case-series at a medium-term follow-up.

Impact of COVID-19 outbreak on esophageal cancer surgery in Northern Italy: lessons learned from a multicentric snapshot.

Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) outbreak has significantly burdened healthcare systems worldwide, leading to reorganization of healthcare services and reallocation of resources. The Italian Society for Study of Esophageal Diseases (SISME) conducted a national survey to evaluate changes in esophageal cancer management in a region severely struck by COVID-19 pandemic. A web-based questionnaire (26 items) was sent to 12 SISME units. Short-term outcomes of esophageal resections performed during the lockdown were compared with those achieved in the same period of 2019. Six (50%) centers had significant restrictions in their activity. However, overall number of resections did not decrease compared to 2019, while a higher rate of open esophageal resections was observed (40 vs. 21.7%; P = 0.034). Surgery was delayed in 24 (36.9%) patients in 6 (50%) centers, mostly due to shortage of anesthesiologists, and occupation of intensive care unit beds from intubated COVID-19 patients. Indications for neoadjuvant chemo (radio) therapy were extended in 14% of patients. Separate COVID-19 hospital pathways were active in 11 (91.7%) units. COVID-19 screening protocols included nasopharyngeal swab in 91.7%, chest computed tomography scan in 8.3% and selective use of lung ultrasound in 75% of units. Postoperative interstitial pneumonia occurred in 1 (1.5%) patient. Recovery from COVID-19 pandemic was characterized by screening of patients in all units, and follow-up outpatient visits in only 33% of units. This survey shows that clinical strategies differed considerably among the 12 SISME centers. Evidence-based guidelines are needed to support the surgical esophageal community and to standardize clinical practice in case of further pandemics.

The Landmark Series: Minimally Invasive (Laparoscopic and Robotic) Colorectal Cancer Surgery.

Current high-quality evidence supports the routine use of the laparoscopic approach for patients with colon cancer. Laparoscopic colectomy is associated with earlier resumption of gastrointestinal function and shorter hospital stay, with no increased morbidity or mortality. Pathology and long-term oncologic outcomes are similar to those achieved with open surgery. The absolute benefits of laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer are still under evaluation. While its safety in terms of early postoperative clinical outcomes has been confirmed, two recent randomized controlled trial (RCTs) have questioned its routine use even in expert hands, since its non-inferiority has not been demonstrated when compared with the gold standard of open surgery. Furthermore, the impact of robotic technology is still unclear, since the only RCT available so far failed to demonstrate any benefits compared with standard laparoscopic rectal resection.

Long-term oncologic outcomes following anastomotic leak after anterior resection for rectal cancer: does the leak severity matter?

BACKGROUND: The evidence regarding the impact of anastomotic leak (AL) after anterior resection (AR) for rectal cancer on oncologic outcomes is controversial, and there are no data about the prognostic relevance of the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer (ISREC) AL classification. The aim was to evaluate the oncologic outcomes in patients with AL after AR for rectal cancer. The prognostic value of the ISREC AL grading system was also investigated. METHODS: It is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database including all patients undergoing curative elective AR for rectal cancer (April 1998-September 2013). AL severity was defined according to the ISREC criteria. A multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of poor survival. RESULTS: A total of 532 patients underwent curative AR (69% laparoscopic) for rectal cancer. The overall AL rate was 7.9%: 15 grade B and 27 grade C ALs. With a median follow-up of 80 (range 12-266) months, 5-year overall survival (OS) was 67.2% in patients with AL and 86.5% in those without AL (P = 0.001). Five-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 50.5% and 80.3%, respectively (P < 0.001). Local recurrence and distant metastases developed more frequently in AL patients (P < 0.05). Grade B AL and no administration or delay of adjuvant chemotherapy were independent predictors for poorer OS and DFS. Grade B AL independently affected also the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy. Circulating C-reactive protein levels at 2 weeks after AL treatment were higher in grade B than grade C patients (P = 0.006) and in patients with tumor relapse (P = 0.011). CONCLUSION: AL after curative AR for rectal cancer and impaired use of adjuvant chemotherapy are associated with poor survival. Postoperative systemic inflammation seems to be more sustained in grade B than that in grade C AL patients, with possible adverse impact on long-term survival.

Robotic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass as a Revisional Bariatric Procedure: a Single-Center Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the procedure of choice to manage the failure of primary bariatric surgery. However, the current evidence on the role of the robotic technology in revisional bariatric surgery is very limited. The aim of this study is to report safety and effectiveness of revisional RYGB performed with the DaVinci Robotic Surgical System (R-rRYGB) after failed primary bariatric surgery. METHODS: Clinical data of consecutive patients undergoing R-rRYGB were included in a prospectively collected database. Intraoperative findings, early postoperative outcomes, and 1-year follow-up results were considered. Primary outcome was postoperative morbidity rate. Secondary outcomes were conversion to open surgery, length of stay, percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), resolution of complications, and costs. RESULTS: A total of 68 patients underwent R-rRYGB at our department from 2011 to 2016. Primary procedures were laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (n = 10), vertical banded gastroplasty (n = 43), and sleeve gastrectomy (n = 15). Conversion rate to open surgery was 2.9%. Postoperative morbidity rate was 8.8%, with no anastomotic leaks reported. Total cost for surgical procedure was 14,334.7 ± 2920.4 €. CONCLUSIONS: Revisional RYGB is a complex procedure but can be performed with the robotic approach with a low morbidity rate. Weight loss outcomes and resolution of complications of the index procedure are satisfactory.

GERD: Presence and Size of Hiatal Hernia Influence Clinical Presentation, Esophageal Function, Reflux Profile, and Degree of Mucosal Injury.

A hiatal hernia (HH) is a frequent finding in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). We examined a consecutive series of patients with GERD diagnosed by a 24-hour pH monitoring. Based on the presence and size of HH on barium swallow, patients were divided into the following groups: no HH, HH <3 cm, HH 3-5 cm and HH >5 cm. A total of 175 patients were included: 43 with no HH, 86 with HH <3 cm, 34 with HH 3-5 cm, and 12 with HH >5 cm. Patients with larger HH had more frequent episodes of coughing and wheezing associated with episodes of reflux. High-resolution manometry showed that the increasing size of the HH was associated with decreasing pressure of the lower esophageal sphincter and weaker peristalsis. Ambulatory pH monitoring revealed that patients with larger HH had more acid reflux, in both the distal and proximal esophagus. Endoscopy showed that patients with larger HH had more severe esophagitis. Fifty per cent of patients with HH >5.0 cm had Barrett's esophagus. These findings should guide gastroenterologists and surgeons in choosing the appropriate therapy in patients with GERD and large HH.

Comparison of the outcome of laparoscopic procedures for GERD.

A total laparoscopic fundoplication has become the procedure of choice for the surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease in patients with normal esophageal motility, with reduced postoperative pain, faster recovery and similar long-term outcomes compared to conventional open total fundoplication. Most controversial surgical aspects are the division of the short gastric vessels and the insertion of a bougie to calibrate the wrap. The anterior 180° and the posterior partial fundoplications lead to similar control of heartburn when compared to total fundoplication with lower risk of dysphagia. However, when performed, 24-h pH monitoring shows pathologic reflux more frequently after partial than total fundoplication. Disappointing results are achieved by anterior 90° partial fundoplication. More recently, a magnetic sphincter augmentation with the LINX Reflux Management System (Torax Medical) and the lower esophageal sphincter Electrical Stimulation (EndoStim) have been developed, seeking for a durable and effective minimally invasive alternative to laparoscopic fundoplication for the treatment of reflux. Both devices seem to be promising, with very low postoperative complications and good short-term functional outcomes. Large randomized controlled trials comparing them with laparoscopic fundoplication over a long period of follow-up are needed to verify their indications and outcomes.

Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy and Fundoplication: What Is the Evidence?

There is no agreement about the best type of fundoplication to add in patients undergoing laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) for achalasia to reduce the risk of postoperative gastroesophageal reflux. This article reviews the current evidence about the outcomes in achalasia patients undergoing LHM with a partial anterior, a partial posterior, or a total fundoplication. We performed a review of the literature in PubMed/Medline electronic databases, which was evaluated according to the GRADE system. The results of the published randomized controlled trials show with a high level of evidence that the addition of a fundoplication reduces the risk of postoperative abnormal reflux, without impairing the food emptying of the esophagus. LHM with partial fundoplication is considered in most centers worldwide the standard of care for the treatment of patients with achalasia. The current evidence fails to show any significant difference between partial anterior and posterior fundoplication. In the absence of further large randomized controlled trial, the decision of performing an anterior or a posterior wrap is based on the surgeon's experience and preference. The addition of a partial fundoplication to LHM leads to a significantly lower rate of postoperative pathological reflux without impairing the esophageal emptying.

Analysis of Early and Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes After Converted Laparoscopic Resection Compared to Primary Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic rectal resection (LRR) for cancer is a challenging procedure, with conversion to open surgery being reported in up to 30% of cases. Since only a few studies with short follow-up have compared converted LRR and open RR (ORR), it is unclear if conversion to open surgery should be prevented by preferring an open approach in those patients with preoperatively known risk factors for conversion. The aim of this study was to compare early postoperative outcomes and long-term survival after completed LRR, converted LRR or ORR for non-metastatic rectal cancer. METHODS: A prospective database of consecutive curative LRRs and ORRs for rectal cancer was reviewed. Patients undergoing LRR who required conversion (CONV group) were compared with those who had primary open rectal surgery (OPEN group) and completed LRR (LAP group). A multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of poor survival. RESULTS: A total of 537 patients were included in the study: 272 in the LAP group, 49 in the CONV group and 216 in the OPEN group. There were no significant differences in perioperative morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay between the three groups. Five-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates did not significantly differ between LAP, CONV and OPEN patients: 83.9 versus 77.8 versus 81% (P = 0.398) and 74.5 versus 62.9 versus 72.7% (P = 0.145), respectively. Similar 5-year OS and DFS rates were observed between patients who had converted LRR for locally advanced tumor or for non-tumor-related reasons: 81.2 versus 80.8% (P = 0.839) and 62.5 versus 63.7% (P = 0.970), respectively. Poor grade of tumor differentiation, lymphovascular invasion and a lymph node ratio of 0.25 or greater, but not conversion, were independently associated with poorer survival. CONCLUSION: Conversion to open surgery does not impair short-term outcomes and does not jeopardize 5-year survival in patients with rectal cancer when compared to primary open surgery.

Robotic technological aids in esophageal surgery.

Robotic technology is an emerging technology that has been developed in order to overcome some limitations of the standard laparoscopic approach, offering a stereoscopic three-dimensional visualization of the surgical field, increased maneuverability of the surgical tools with consequent increased movement accuracy and precision and improved ergonomics. It has been used for the surgical treatment of most benign esophageal disorders. More recently, it has been proposed also for patients with operable esophageal cancer. The current evidence shows that there are no real benefits of the robotic technology over conventional laparoscopy in patients undergoing a fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), hiatal closure for giant hiatal hernia, or Heller myotomy for achalasia. A few small studies suggest potential advantages in patients undergoing redo surgery for failed fundoplication or Heller myotomy, but large comparative studies are needed to better clarify the role of the robotic technology in these patients. Robot-assisted esophagectomy seems to be safe and effective in selected patients; however, there are no data showing superiority of this approach over both conventional laparoscopic and open surgery. The short-term and long-term oncologic results of ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are awaited to validate this approach for the treatment of esophageal cancer.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease and morbid obesity: To sleeve or not to sleeve?

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has reached wide popularity during the last 15 years, due to the limited morbidity and mortality rates, and the very good weight loss results and effects on comorbid conditions. However, there are concerns regarding the effects of LSG on gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The interpretation of the current evidence is challenged by the fact that the LSG technique is not standardized, and most studies investigate the presence of GERD by assessing symptoms and the use of acid reducing medications only. A few studies objectively investigated gastroesophageal function and the reflux profile by esophageal manometry and 24-h pH monitoring, reporting postoperative normalization of esophageal acid exposure in up to 85% of patients with preoperative GERD, and occurrence of de novo GERD in about 5% of cases. There is increasing evidence showing the key role of the surgical technique on the incidence of postoperative GERD. Main technical issues are a relative narrowing of the mid portion of the gastric sleeve, a redundant upper part of the sleeve (both depending on the angle under which the sleeve is stapled), and the presence of a hiatal hernia. Concomitant hiatal hernia repair is recommended. To date, either medical therapy with proton pump inhibitors or conversion of LSG to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass are the available options for the management of GERD after LSG. Recently, new minimally invasive approaches have been proposed in patients with GERD and hypotensive LES: the LINX® Reflux Management System procedure and the Stretta® procedure. Large studies are needed to assess the safety and long-term efficacy of these new approaches. In conclusion, the recent publication of pH monitoring data and the new insights in the association between sleeve morphology and GERD control have led to a wider acceptance of LSG as bariatric procedure also in obese patients with GERD, as recently stated in the 5th International Consensus Conference on sleeve gastrectomy.

Surgical Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) affects an estimated 20% of the population in the USA, and its prevalence is increasing worldwide. Lifestyle modifications and proton pump inhibitors (PPI) therapy are effective in the majority of patients and remain the mainstay of treatment of GERD. However, some patients will need surgical intervention because they have partial control of symptoms, do not want to be on long-term medical treatment, or suffer complications related to PPI therapy. AIMS: The aim of this study was to review the available evidence that supports laparoscopic antireflux surgery, and to study the effect of surgical therapy on the natural history of GERD. RESULTS: The key elements for the success of antireflux surgery are proper patient selection, careful analysis of the indications for surgery, complete pre-operative work-up, and proper execution of the surgical technique. CONCLUSIONS: When the key elements are respected, antireflux surgery is very effective in controlling GERD, and it is associated to minimal morbidity and mortality.