Redo fundoplication vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass conversion for failed anti-reflux surgery: which is better?

INTRODUCTION: Different techniques have been proposed for reoperation after failed anti-reflux surgery. However, there is no consensus on which should be preferred. We aim to report and compare the outcomes of different revisional techniques for failed anti-reflux surgery. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent redo fundoplication (RF) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) conversion after a failed fundoplication at our institution between 2016 and 2021. The primary outcome was long-term presence of reflux or dysphagia following revisional surgery. Secondary outcomes included 30-day perioperative complications as well as long-term use of anti-reflux medication and radiographic recurrence of hiatal hernia (HH). RESULTS: A total of 165 (median age 63 years, 73.9% female) patients were included. RF was performed in 120 (73 Toupet and 47 Nissen), RYGB in 38, and 7 patients had fundoplication takedown alone. The RYGB group had a significantly higher BMI, and more prior revisional surgeries compared to the other groups. Median operative time and length of stay were longer for RYGB. Twenty (12.1%) patients experienced postoperative complications, with the highest incidence in the RYGB group. Reflux and dysphagia improved significantly for the whole cohort, with the greatest improvement noted with reflux in the RYGB group (89.5% with preoperative reflux vs. 10.5% with postoperative reflux, p = < .001). On multivariable regression we found that prior re-operative surgery was associated with persistent reflux and dysphagia, whereas RYGB conversion was protective against reflux. CONCLUSION: Conversion to RYGB may offer superior resolution of reflux than RF, especially for obese patients.

Preoperative high respiratory quotient correlates with lower weight loss after bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: The respiratory coefficient (RQ), as determined by indirect calorimetry (IC), classifies diet as being carbohydrate rich (RQ = 0.7-0.8), fat rich (RQ = 0.9-1.0), or overfeeding (RQ > 1). We hypothesized that preoperative RQ may be associated with weight-loss outcomes after bariatric surgery. METHODS: From 2016 to 2018, 137 obese patients were enrolled in a Bariatric Registry and underwent dietary and behavioral counseling, followed by preoperative IC. Resting energy expenditure (REE) and RQ of all patients was measured. Patients were classified as over-feeders (OF; 42, 31%) with RQ > 1 or non-over-feeders (NOF; 95, 69%) with RQ < 1. At baseline, there was no difference between groups in gender [female: 105 (76.6%), male: 32 (23.4%)], body mass index (BMI; OF: 46.8 ± 7.8 vs. NOF: 44.8 ± 7.4 kg/m2, p = 0.40), or baseline REE (OF: 1897 ± 622 vs. NOF: 1874 ± 579, p = 0.74), although OF were younger [mean age (OF: 47.1 ± 13.0 years vs. NOF: 43.1 ± 13.4; p = 0.009). At 6-month follow-up 94 patients [53.28%; OF: 35 (83%) vs. NOF: 59 (62%), p = 0.016] were seen and 48 [35.03%; OF: 23 (55%) vs. NOF: 25 (59%), p = 0.001] at 12-month follow-up. On preoperative psychological assessment, OF had a significantly higher rate of childhood neglect (OF: 28 (47.46%) vs. NOF: 40 (28.99%); p = 0.01). RESULTS: At 1 year postoperatively, the OF had a significantly higher BMI (OF: 34.3 ± 6.5 vs. NOF: 29.3 ± 5.1 kg/m2, p = 0.009). Differences in weight were not significant at 6-month (OF: 36.0 ± 6.5 vs. NOF: 33.5 ± 5.9 kg/m2, p = 0.07). There was no difference between type of operation and RQ group (RYGB; OF: 55 (75%) vs. NOF: 18 (25%) and SG; OF: 40 (62%) vs. NOF: 24 (38%), p = 0.14), nor in BMI loss after operation. CONCLUSION: Evidence of overfeeding in the preoperative period prior to bariatric surgery is associated with higher resultant BMI at 1 year. Calculation of the RQ with IC has prognostic significance in bariatric surgery, and calculation of REE based on assumed normal RQ potentiates error. It is unclear if overfeeding is purely behavioral or secondary to potentially reversible metabolic etiology.

Strategies for surgical remediation of the multi-fundoplication failure patient.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes are not well studied in patients undergoing remediation for multi-fundoplication failure, that is, two or more prior failed fundoplications. Re-operation must balance reflux control and restoration of the ability to eat with the challenge of reconstructing a distorted hiatus and GE junction. The purpose of this study is to present our experience with surgical remediation for multi-fundoplication failure. METHODS: Medical records were retrospectively reviewed of 91 patients who underwent third time or more esophagogastric operation for fundoplication failure at a single institution from 2007 to 2016. Dysphagia was present in 56% and heartburn in 51%. Median number of prior operations was 2 with range up to 6. Anatomic failure consisted of slipped wrap in 26 cases, wrap herniation in 23, hiatal stenosis in 24, hiatal mesh complication in 8, and wrap dehiscence in 10. Operative approaches generally followed an institutional algorithm and consisted of hiatal hernia repair with: re-do fundoplication in 55%, takedown of fundoplication alone in 24%, Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy in 14%, and GE junction resection in 7%. Laparoscopic approach was successful in 81%. RESULTS: Mean duration of operations was 217 min and median length of stay was 3 days. The complication rate was 13%, with 7% undergoing unplanned early re-operation. Patients were followed for mean 11 months, and recurrent hiatal hernia was detected in 13%. Late re-operation was performed in 6% for recurrent hiatal hernia. Recurrent reflux symptomatology resolved in 93%. Dysphagia resolved in 84%. There were no significant differences in outcomes with regard to number of prior operations, operative approach, BMI, or age. CONCLUSIONS: There is no single best approach to remediation in the multi-fundoplication failure patient. Re-do fundoplication is appropriate in over half of patients. Reoperation for multi-fundoplication failure can be performed via minimally invasive approach with excellent remediation of symptoms, low morbidity, and low recurrence rates.

Laparoscopic repair of giant paraesophageal hernia: are there factors associated with anatomic recurrence?

BACKGROUND: Repair of giant paraesophageal hernia (PEH) is associated with a favorably high rate of symptom improvement; however, rates of recurrence by objective measures remain high. Herein we analyze our experience with laparoscopic giant PEH repair to determine what factors if any can predict anatomic recurrence. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on PEH characteristics, variations in operative techniques, and surgeon factors for 595 patients undergoing laparoscopic PEH repair from 2008 to 2015. Upper GI study was performed at 6 months postoperatively and selectively thereafter-any supra-diaphragmatic stomach was considered hiatal hernia recurrence. Exclusion criteria included revisional operation (22.4%), size <5 cm (17.6%), inadequate follow-up (17.8%), and confounding concurrent operations (6.9%). Inclusion criteria were met by 202 patients (31% male, median age 71 years, and median BMI 28.7). RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 6 months (IQR 6-12), overall anatomic recurrence rate was 34.2%. Symptom recurrence rate was 9.9% and revisional operation was required in ten patients (4.9%). Neither patient demographics nor PEH characteristics (size, presence of Cameron erosions, esophagitis, or Barrett's) correlated with anatomic recurrence. Technical factors at operation (mobilized intra-abdominal length of esophagus, Collis gastroplasty, number of anterior/posterior stitches, use of crural buttress, use of pledgeted or mattress sutures, or gastrostomy) were also not correlated with recurrence. Regarding surgeon factors, annual volume of fewer than ten cases per year was associated with increased risk of anatomic failure (54 vs 33%, P = 0.02). Multivariate analysis identified surgeon experience (<10 cases per year) as an independent factor associated with early hiatal hernia recurrence (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.34-10.9). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic repair of giant PEH is associated with high anatomic recurrence rate but excellent symptom control. PEH characteristics and technical operative variables do not appear to significantly affect rates of recurrence. In contrast, surgeon volume does appear to contribute significantly to durability of repair.

Correction to: Endoscopic and surgical management of nonampullary duodenal neoplasms.

This article was updated to correct the author listing for Carlos Roberto Simons-Linares.

Endoscopic and surgical management of nonampullary duodenal neoplasms.

BACKGROUND: Sporadic nonampullary duodenal neoplasms (SNADN) can have malignant potential for which endoscopic and surgical resections are offered. We report combined gastroenterologic and surgical experience for treatment of SNADN, including endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and pancreas-preserving partial duodenectomy (PPPD). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 121 consecutive patients, who underwent 30 PPPDs and 91 EMRs for mucosal and submucosal SNADN. Decision to undergo EMR or surgical resection was based on expert endoscopist and surgeon discretion including multidisciplinary tumor board review. Main outcomes were recurrence rate of neoplasia and adverse events requiring hospital admission or prolonged care. EMRs were performed with submucosal lifting followed by snare resection. PPPD included total duodenectomy, supra-ampullary PPPD for neoplasms proximal to the ampulla, and infra-ampullary PPPD for lesions distal to the ampulla. Follow-up data were available for 65% of EMR and 73% of surgical patients. RESULTS: Surgically resected neoplasia was larger with more advanced neoplasia and submucosal lesions. En bloc resection was achieved in all surgical resections and in 53% of EMRs. Post-EMR, mucosal and submucosal neoplasia recurred in 32 and 0%, respectively, including five neoplasms (26%) after an initial negative esophagogastroduodenoscopy. All recurrences were treated endoscopically. Complications occurred in 14 endoscopically and eight surgically treated patients, none requiring surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Post-EMR patients had higher recurrence of mucosal neoplasia, whereas submucosal neoplasms, mainly carcinoid, did not recur. Polyp size and positive resection margin were not associated with neoplasia recurrence. Patients with SNADN could benefit from a multidisciplinary approach to stratify the optimal treatment based on local expertise.

Revisional surgery after failed esophagogastric myotomy for achalasia: successful esophageal preservation.

BACKGROUND: Treatment failure with recurrent dysphagia after Heller myotomy occurs in fewer than 10 % of patients, most of whom will seek repeat surgical intervention. These reoperations are technically challenging, and as such, there exist only limited reports of reoperation with esophageal preservation. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients who sought operative intervention from March 1998 to December 2014 for obstructed swallowing after esophagogastric myotomy. All patients underwent a systematic approach, including complete hiatal dissection, takedown of prior fundoplication, and endoscopic assessment of myotomy. Patterns of failure were categorized as: fundoplication failure, inadequate myotomy, fibrosis, and mucosal stricture. RESULTS: A total of 58 patients underwent 65 elective reoperations. Four patients underwent esophagectomy as their initial reoperation, while three patients ultimately required esophagectomy. The remainder underwent reoperations with the goal of esophageal preservation. Of these 58, 46 were first-time reoperations; ten were second time; and two were third-time reoperations. Forty-one had prior operations via a trans-abdominal approach, 11 via thoracic approach, and 6 via combined approaches. All reoperations at our institution were performed laparoscopically (with two conversions to open). Inadequate myotomy was identified in 53 % of patients, fundoplication failure in 26 %, extensive fibrosis in 19 %, and mucosal stricture in 2 %. Intraoperative esophagogastric perforation occurred in 19 % of patients and was repaired. Our postoperative leak rate was 5 %. Esophageal preservation was possible in 55 of the 58 operations in which it was attempted. At median follow-up of 34 months, recurrent dysphagia after reoperation was seen in 63 % of those with a significant fibrosis versus 28 % with inadequate myotomy, 25 % with failed wrap, and 100 % with mucosal stricture (p = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic reoperation with esophageal preservation is successful in the majority of patients with recurrent dysphagia after Heller myotomy. The pattern of failure has implications for relief of dysphagia with reoperative intervention.

Prospective evaluation of 24-hour urine profiles following bariatric surgery in a modern comprehensive care bariatric clinic.

AIMS: To prospectively examine the effect of modern bariatric surgery on 24-hour urine parameters in a comprehensive care bariatric practice (CCBP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 47 consecutive patients in our CCBP underwent serum and 24-hour urine analysis pre-operatively, and 30 returned at 12 months for repeat testing. Paired comparisons for serum metabolite and 24-hour urine measures were performed using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test for continuous variables and McNemar's test for categorical variables. Statistical tests were two-sided, with threshold of significance set at p = 0.05. RESULTS: All 30 patients with pre-operative and 12-month follow-up analysis were free of stone events. 20 (67%) had Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), 6 (20%) had laparoscopic gastric banding (LGB), and 4 (13%)h ad laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). 24-hour urinary parameters were available for 27 patients. Median urine oxalate (mmol) was 0.29 pre-operatively and 0.21 at 12 months (p = 0.048). Median urine calcium (mg) was 143 pre-operatively and 180 at 12 months (p = 0.11). Median citrate excretion was 527 pre-operatively and 782 at 12 months (p = 0.22). Median serum creatinine was 0.7 pre-operatively and 0.8 at 12 months (p < 0.001). These trends were preserved with the exclusion of LGB and LSG patients. CONCLUSIONS: Modern bariatric surgery (RYGB, LGB, and LSG) as part of a CCBP can still demonstrate alterations of select urinary parameters (particularly oxalate and citrate) in select patients associated with an increased risk of urolithiasis at 1 year follow-up.

Variability of NSQIP-assessed surgical quality based on age and disease process.

BACKGROUND: Recent national attention has focused on improving upon the surgical quality of hospitals across the United States. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database includes expected morbidity probability for each surgical patient. We sought to investigate the accuracy of this probability across the spectrum of general surgical operations and assess the variability based on the age and disease process. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the 2008 ACS-NSQIP database, we identified 190,929 operations that would be in the scope of practice of a modern general surgeon; the four most common included breast resection (n = 22,175; 11.6%), colon resection (n = 21,363; 11.2%), cholecystectomy (n = 20,889; 10.9%), and inguinal hernia repair (n = 11,709; 6.1%). We calculated the surgical observed versus expected morbidity rates (O/E) of each operation type and compared them by decile of patient age. We then determined the effect of case mix and patient age on theoretical hospitals performing at the NSQIP average. RESULTS: There is substantial variability in O/E ratios when comparing these disease processes across deciles of age. For patients undergoing breast resections, 67.2% of morbidities were solely attributed to 30-d reoperations; colon resections had an O/E ratio greater than 1 for all age deciles except over 90 y old. For cholecystectomies and the majority of patients undergoing inguinal hernia repairs, there was a lower morbidity rate than expected. Case mix and patient age were found to independently affect assessment of hospital quality. CONCLUSIONS: It is conceivable that general surgery case mix and patient age could independently affect the quality assessment of a hospital. This variability may have implications for overall quality measures.

Cost analysis of open and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single institution comparison.

INTRODUCTION: The laparoscopic approach to pancreaticoduodenectomy has been recently more frequently reported and is now being performed at multiple centers across the US. While laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) has been shown to be safe and feasible, comparing its cost in relation to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) has not been examined. The aim of this study is to examine the cost of LPD compared with OPD at a single institution over a 3-year time period. METHODS: An institutional database was analyzed to compare patients who underwent OPD and LPD (including Whipple resections and total pancreatectomy) between May 2009 and June 2012. A cost analysis was performed, which included the use the hospital billing database to assess surgical costs, hospital admission costs, and overall cost of the patient's care during the index admission. The operative costs were further analyzed with respect to OR time and surgical supplies. Standard statistical analysis was performed to assess for significance. RESULTS: In the study time period, 123 patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy, including 48 OPD (39%) and 75 LPD (61%). The groups were similar with respect to age, gender, ASA, vein resection, and indication for surgery. In the LPD group, the use of hand assist or conversion to OPD occurred in 3 (4%) and 10 (13%) patients, respectively. Additionally, 10% of the OPD group underwent total pancreatectomy (n = 5), compared to 21% of the LPD (n = 16). Mean operative time for OPD and LPD was 355 min (range 199-681) and 551 min (range 390-819) respectively (p < 0.0001). Median hospital stay for OPD and LPD was 8 days (range 5-63), and 7 days (range 4-68) respectively (p = 0.5). Morbidity rates were equal at 31% for the two groups. The LPD group was associated with significantly higher surgical cost due to both increased time and supply cost. However, mean hospital admission cost associated with OPD was greater in comparison to the LPD group, though not significant. The overall total cost of care was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: LPD is associated with equivalent overall cost compared with OPD. While operating time and supply costs were higher for LPD, this was balanced by decreased cost of the postoperative admission.

Technical and perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy in the prone position.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is performed through various approaches, including using video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for mediastinal esophageal dissection. The prone technique allows for gravity-aided retraction of the lung. The aim of this study was to examine perioperative outcomes after prone MIE in relation to patient preoperative comorbidities. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study from our single tertiary-care center is presented. Between January 2007 and August 2010, a total of 42 patients underwent three-field prone MIE. The majority of patients were male (37 vs. 5 female), with an average age of 68 years (range = 37-87). The diagnoses for patients who underwent MIE were 35 adenocarcinoma, four Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia, two achalasia, and one squamous cell carcinoma. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy was administered to 16 (38 %) patients. Preoperative comorbidities were quantified using the Modified Charlson Comorbidity Index; low risk was defined as a score of 0-2 (23 patients), moderate risk 3-4 (14 patients), and high risk 5 or higher (five patients). Postoperative complications were stratified using the Clavien Classification Scale; minor complications were grades 1 and 2 and major complications were grades 3-5. RESULTS: Median length of hospital stay was 8 days (range = 6-51) and median ICU stay was 2 days (range = 1-26). Average prone surgical time was 108 min (range = 67-198). Thirty-seven of 42 patients (88 %) were extubated on the day of operation. Postoperatively, all five high-risk patients had a complication, three of which were major. Eight of the 14 moderate-risk patients had a complication and three were major, and 17 of the 23 low-risk group had a complication with nine being major. There was a total of 15 major complications. Predominant complications were arrhythmias (15) and pneumonia (five), with four anastomotic leaks and two postoperative 30-day mortalities. CONCLUSIONS: This series supports using prone MIE. Despite a clinical pathway, including immediate extubation postoperatively, there is still a risk of pulmonary complications that appears to correlate with higher preoperative comorbidity scores.

Comparison of open with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a single institution's transition over a 7-year period.

OBJECTIVES: Many studies have shown laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) to have benefits over open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). This institution made a unique abrupt transition from an exclusively open approach to a preference for the laparoscopic technique. This study aimed to compare outcomes in patients undergoing LDP and ODP, respectively, over the period of transition. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing LDP (n = 82) or ODP (n = 90) was performed. Surrogate oncologic markers for the subgroup of patients with malignant disease were also studied. RESULTS: The ODP and LDP groups were well matched with regard to demographics, comorbidities and tumour characteristics. Significant differences were noted in favour of the LDP group in which decreases were seen in estimated blood loss (<0.001), need for packed red blood cell transfusions (<0.001), length of hospital stay (<0.001) and intensive care unit stay (<0.001). No other significant differences in the occurrence of complications or oncologic outcomes were seen. Rates of Grade B and C fistulae were 10% and 6% in the ODP and LDP groups, respectively. Grade III-V complications occurred in 20% and 13% of the ODP and LDP groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy continues to compare favourably with ODP when well-matched patient series are reviewed. The results show a decreased need for blood transfusions and hospital resources in LDP. Additionally, there may be oncologic advantages associated with LDP compared with ODP in pancreatic malignancies.

Can Risk-Based Thromboprophylaxis Practice Guidelines be Safely Used in Esophagectomy Cases? Experience of an Academic Health System.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) occurs in 3-11% of esophagectomy patients and is associated with increased mortality and morbidity. The use of validated VTE risk assessment tools and compliance with recommended practice guidelines remains unclear. In this study, we seek to determine the use of Caprini guideline indicated VTE prophylaxis and its effect on VTE and bleeding complications following esophagectomy. METHODS: Esophagectomy cases were identified from the Mayo Clinic electronic health records. Caprini score and VTE prophylaxis regimen received were determined retrospectively. VTE prophylaxis was identified as appropriate or inappropriate based on the Caprini score and prophylaxis received preoperative, during hospitalization, and after hospital discharge. Study cohorts were compared by Pearson Chi-square test, Fisher's Exact test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and logistic regression models. Stata/MP 16.1 was used for analysis. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were reported for logistic regression models. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Four hundred and fifty-six esophagectomy cases were analyzed. The median Caprini score was thirteen. Appropriate prophylaxis resulted in a 6.9-fold reduction in inpatient VTE. All 30- and 90-day post-discharge VTEs occurred in those not receiving Caprini guideline-indicated VTE prophylaxis. Inpatient, 30- and 90-day post-discharge bleeding rates were 7.68%, 0.91%, and 2.11%, respectively; however, bleeding was not increased with receipt of appropriate prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: In this esophagectomy cohort, Caprini guideline indicated VTE prophylaxis resulted in reduced inpatient VTE events without increasing bleeding complications. Risk-based VTE prevention measures should be considered in this patient cohort known to be at heightened risk for postoperative VTE.

Breast surgery outcomes as quality measures according to the NSQIP database.

BACKGROUND: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a risk-adjusted database designed to benchmark quality initiatives. NSQIP captures uniform morbidity variables for all operations and calculates expected morbidity probabilities. Given the frequent need for reoperation following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy, we hypothesized that NSQIP may inaccurately reflect surgical morbidity after breast cancer operations. METHODS: Using the 2008 NSQIP database, we identified 24,447 breast surgery patients. We calculated the observed versus expected (O/E) morbidity ratios, compared them to other general surgery procedures, and analyzed the O/E morbidity ratios among benign and malignant breast diagnoses. RESULTS: The NSQIP database shows that breast surgery has an O/E morbidity ratio of 3.11, which is higher than other general surgery procedures. Additionally, breast operations for malignancy have higher O/E morbidity ratios (3.22) than those performed for benign disease (2.59). Analysis of malignant patients by CPT code revealed that BCS patients had an O/E morbidity ratio of 7.75 and attributed 89 % of morbidity to reoperation, whereas mastectomy patients had an O/E morbidity ratio of only 1.7. Elimination of the reoperation variable from morbidity calculations in breast surgery reduces the O/E morbidity ratio to less than expected in all breast procedures. DISCUSSION: Breast surgery has a higher O/E morbidity ratio than other general surgery procedures. Reoperations are expected in BCS for positive margins and in mastectomy for completion ALND. Breast surgeons should advocate for benchmarking by surgical site-specific metrics, because current NSQIP criteria may negatively affect the quality assessment of high-volume breast centers.

Use of mesh for hiatal hernia repair: a survey of SAGES members.

BACKGROUND: Mesh use during hiatal hernia repair (HHR) has been suggested to be safe and effective. Concern has been raised about the risk of mesh-related complications, and the higher risk of complications if revisional hiatal surgery is undertaken after mesh has been used. Available data have not established a clear role for mesh in HHR. To assess surgeons' adoption of the use of mesh for HHR, SAGES members were surveyed regarding their practice related to mesh use for HHR. METHODS: Between April and September 2010, an internet-based survey tool was used to survey SAGES members. Potential participants were contacted via e-mail and invited to complete the survey. Of the 5,323 attempted contacts, 5,024 reached active e-mail accounts. From these, 2,518 members responded (50% response rate). RESULTS: The majority of respondents currently perform HHR (69%), but only 18% perform more than 20 per year. Of those who perform HHR, 94% use a laparoscopic approach for the majority of repairs. Whereas 25% of surgeons use mesh for the majority of repairs, 23% of surgeons never use mesh. When mesh is used, an absorbable mesh is most commonly used (67%). An onlay technique is used by 93% of respondents. Only 7% of surgeons who have been in practice more than 20 years use mesh compared with 59% of surgeons in practice less than 10 years. Fifty-seven percent of surgeons have never performed revisional foregut surgery on a patient with prior mesh. CONCLUSIONS: Although the majority of surgeons have used mesh for HHR, it is the minority who use it routinely, with younger surgeons more likely to use mesh than older surgeons. Absorbable mesh is most commonly used. When mesh is used, an onlay technique is most commonly used. There is no clear accepted use of mesh in hiatal hernia repair.

Pancreas-sparing total duodenectomy for ampullary duodenal neoplasms.

BACKGROUND: Ampullary and extensive periampullary lesions can be difficult to treat and often require pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for complete removal, even if benign. However, PD may be overtreatment for noninvasive lesions, and pancreas-sparing total duodenectomy (PSTD) is an emerging valid surgical option for selected cases. METHODS: We reviewed patients undergoing PSTD at our institution over 16 months and a comparison group who had undergone PD for benign duodenal disease over the past 15 years. We also reviewed cases in the English-language literature and performed a meta-analysis of those patients who had undergone PSTD. RESULTS: PSTD had been performed in four patients, who had an average hospital length of stay (LOS) of 13 days; two of them experienced complications. None required conversion to PD, experienced a postoperative fistula or endocrine or exocrine insufficiency, or required intensive care. Two of the PSTDs were performed laparoscopically. Open PD for benign duodenal disease was performed in 22 patients, with overall morbidity and pancreas fistula rates of 82 and 27 %, respectively. The meta-analysis found 128 unique cases of PSTD with morbidity and mortality rates of 46.4 and 2.3 %, respectively. Pancreaticobiliary leak was seen in 20 %, with an average LOS of 17 days. CONCLUSIONS: Although PSTD can be used to avoid PD and can be performed laparoscopically, it is technically challenging and still associated with morbidity.

What extent of pancreatic resection do patients with MEN-1 require?

CONTEXT: The surgical management of pancreatic endocrine tumors in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN-1) is controversial and complicated by the fact that these tumors are frequently multifocal. The degree of tumor resection is determined by weighing the risk of malignancy or tumor recurrence against the risks of endocrine/exocrine insufficiency with complete gland removal. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed identifying 4 patients with MEN-1 and pancreatic endocrine tumors treated with pancreatic resection over a 2-year period at our institution. RESULTS: Mean age at operation was 35 years. Surgical approach was determined by size of tumor(s) and presence of multifocality. MRI and EUS were performed in all patients. While EUS identified a greater number of tumors when compared to MRI (median 5 versus 1), both studies grossly underestimated the total number of tumors found on final pathology. Three patients underwent laparoscopic total pancreatectomy for multifocal disease with diffuse pancreatic involvement, finding a median of 12 tumors. One patient underwent laparoscopic subtotal pancreatectomy for a presumed single pancreatic tail mass, but was found to have multifocal disease on final pathology consisting of 7 tumors. The average number of tumors found on final pathology was 13.5 with an average size of 2.6 cm. The median number of lymph nodes analyzed was 14. Diffuse, multifocal disease was present in all 4 patients. No major postoperative complications were observed. CONCLUSION: In patients with MEN-1 and pancreatic endocrine tumors, preoperative workup underestimates extent of disease and total pancreatectomy should be considered for complete tumor removal.

Outcomes of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols Versus Conventional Management in Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery.

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways focus on decreasing surgical stress and promoting return to normal function for patients undergoing surgical procedures. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of an ERAS protocol on outcomes of patients undergoing primary sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), and management of postoperative pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) measured by pain medications and antiemetic use, respectively. Incidence of 90-day emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, and complications were also analyzed. Methods: A retrospective review was performed from October 1, 2016 to October 31, 2018 of patients enrolled in the ERAS versus the conventional pathway. Patient baseline characteristics, pain and nausea scores, LOS, and postoperative outcome variables were collected. Results: Non-ERAS (n = 193) and ERAS (n = 173) groups had similar patient characteristics. Fewer ERAS patients required postoperative opioids and antiemetics (P < .01), with a significant difference in postoperative nausea control in favor of ERAS patients (P < .05). There was a decreasing trend in median LOS (2 versus 1, P = .28), 90-day postoperative readmissions (10.4% versus 8.1%, P = .47), and major adverse events (5.2% versus 1.7%, P = .07) after ERAS implementation. The ED visits and postoperative need for intravenous fluid for dehydration were significantly lower in the ERAS group (P = .01). Conclusion: Implementation of ERAS pathway for bariatric surgery was associated with less opioid usage, PONV, ED visits, and postoperative need for intravenous fluids, without increasing LOS, 90-day readmission or rates of adverse effects.

Video: transcervical videoscopic esophageal dissection in minimally invasive esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) may involve video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for mediastinal esophageal dissection. Usually, VATS requires single-lung ventilation and has associated cardiopulmonary morbidity [1-3]. Alternatively, transhiatal dissection can be performed, although its complications include vocal cord palsy [4], cardiac arrythmias [5], and increased bleeding [5, 6], the latter associated with mortality after esophagectomy [2]. Therefore, the feasibility of MIE using transcervical videoscopic esophageal dissection (TVED) in swine was investigated. A simultaneous laparoscopic and TVED approach may decrease operative time and blood loss while improving visualization and avoiding single-lung ventilation. METHODS: Two pigs (Sus domesticus) underwent two similar procedures. The methods were approved by the authors' Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (no. A24209) under United States Department of Agriculture guidelines. Steps included a cervical incision to accommodate a modified hand-assist access device. The cervical esophagus was dissected. Trocars were placed through the modified access device, and pneumomediastinum was established. The tracheoesophageal plane was dissected into the thorax and beyond the mid esophagus, on which the pleura of the separate mediastinal compartment inserts itself. Vagal nerves were identified and divided distal to recurrent branches. Standard laparoscopic techniques were used for esophagogastric dissection. After specimen extraction, the animals were euthanized. RESULTS: A full circumferential dissection of the mediastinal esophagus was successfully accomplished in two animals using a single-incision TVED for MIE. CONCLUSIONS: A novel technique for mediastinal esophageal dissection using a TVED approach performed with instruments designed for single-port surgery is described. Fortunately, the human lacks the swine's separate mediastinal compartment, and this unique difference should facilitate the human version of this dissection. This approach may avoid the potential morbidity of VATS while providing better visualization and facilitating dissection of the upper mediastinal esophagus compared with either the transhiatal approach or the previously attempted rigid mediastinoscopic approaches [7-9].

Transcervical videoscopic esophageal dissection during two-field minimally invasive esophagectomy: early patient experience.

BACKGROUND: Transhiatal (two-field) esophagectomy reduces cardiopulmonary complications by avoiding thoracic access, but requires blind mediastinal dissection. The authors developed a minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) technique applying single-incision laparoscopy technology to better visualize the thoracic esophageal dissection. This is performed using laparoscopy and simultaneous transcervical videoscopic esophageal dissection (TVED). Our aim is to demonstrate feasibility of two-field MIE with TVED and improve recovery in high-risk patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of eight patients who underwent two-field MIE with TVED over 10 months. The majority were male (N = 6) with mean age of 63 ± 12 years. Mean body mass index (BMI) was 30.2 ± 5.1 kg/m(2). Indications for operation were: high-grade dysplasia (N = 2), adenocarcinoma (N = 6) with one receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Using the Charlson comorbidity index, three patients were low risk and five were high risk. TVED was performed with a modified single-incision access device across the left neck. The mediastinal esophagus was dissected distally and circumferentially with simultaneous transabdominal laparoscopy for gastric conduit creation and distal esophageal dissection. RESULTS: Mean operative time was 292 min (range 194-375 min). Three obese patients required temporary abdominal desufflation to avoid extrinsic mediastinal compression. Mean estimated blood loss was 119 mL (range 25-400 mL). A median of 23 lymph nodes (range 13-29) was harvested. Median intensive care unit (ICU) stay was 1 day (range 1-5 days), and median overall stay was 7 days (range 5-16 days). The three low-risk patients had no major complications. Three of five high-risk patients had major complications, including two cervical anastomotic leaks. Major complications were seen in three of four obese patients (BMI >30 kg/m(2)). There were no mortalities. CONCLUSIONS: The TVED approach may avoid the morbidity of transthoracic esophageal dissection by improving esophageal visualization. Complications with TVED appear to correlate with obesity and comorbidities. Although TVED appears feasible, a larger experience is required.