Randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic Nissen versus Lind fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of laparoscopic Nissen and Lind fundoplication on gastro-oesophageal reflux disease by means of a prospective randomized controlled trial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred and twenty-one patients were randomized to undergo either Nissen (61) or Lind (60) fundoplication. Initial enrollment and subsequent clinical appointments were undertaken 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the procedure using a standardized questionnaire. Ambulatory pH monitoring and manometry were undertaken both preoperatively and at approximately 3 months post-procedure. RESULTS: The mean operating time was similar in both groups (44.8 versus 45 min). One operation in the Lind group was converted to open surgery. Postoperative dysphagia symptoms at 3 and 6 months were higher in the Nissen fundoplication group than in the Lind group (3 months p=0.003; 6 months p=0.020). The time taken to return to work was statistically longer in the Nissen group: at 1 month, 9 of 40 versus 2 of 45 patients had not returned to full activities (p=0.013). Three individuals required re-operation in the Nissen group and 4 individuals in the Lind group because of dysphagia caused by mechanical obstruction. Both procedures demonstrated good Visick scores at 12 months; the Nissen group having 33 (97%) patients with a Visick score of 1 or 2, and the Lind group having 38 (100%) patients with a Visick score of 1 or 2. CONCLUSIONS: Both operations provide good quantitative and qualitative control of gastro-oesophageal reflux. Operation time and postoperative comparators were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups at 1 year.

Proton pump inhibitor influence on reflux in Barrett's oesophagus.

OBJECTIVES: It is important to identify factors responsible for the development of Barrett's oesophagus (BO). The effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on oesophageal clearance of both acid and alkaline reflux in these patients is uncertain and studies comparing BO patients and healthy controls (HCs) have not been performed earlier. METHODS: Two groups of patients were studied: 18 HCs and 12 BO patients. Oesophageal motility, acid reflux and duodenogastro-oesophageal reflux (DGOR) were measured using a three-pressure transducer catheter with an antimony pH tip, connected to a sodium ion selective electrode. All patients were studied both on and off PPIs. RESULTS: Without PPI therapy, BO patients had significantly more upright and supine acid reflux and upright DGOR compared with HCs. During acid reflux, HC demonstrated more peristalsis than BO [HC, % peristalsis=64 (9), BO=53 (8), P<0.01], but this was not seen during DGOR. [HC, % peristalsis=68 (14), BO=56 (11)]. In Barrett's patients, DGOR was significantly reduced with PPIs [off PPI, % upright DGOR=61 (17), on PPIs=19 (15), P<0.01], and no oesophageal motility differences were seen compared with results without PPIs. CONCLUSION: HCs demonstrate better oesophageal motility compared with BO patients to prevent acid and alkaline reflux. When acid reflux occurred, HCs had better coordinated motility to remove it. This increased coordination did not occur during DGOR, suggesting different stimulation mechanisms. PPI reduced DGOR in BO patients, without any change in oesophageal motility.

Does the addition of a prokinetic to proton pump inhibitor therapy help reduce duodenogastro-oesophageal reflux in patients with Barrett's oesophagus?

OBJECTIVE: The metaplastic change of Barrett's oesophagus is linked to both acid and duodenal reflux together with impaired motility. Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) reduce acid reflux, but no treatment is available that reduces duodenogastro-oesophageal reflux (DGOR). The aim of this study was to investigate whether adding a prokinetic to PPI treatment could improve oesophageal motility and subsequently reduce reflux. METHODS: Two groups of patients with Barrett's oesophagus on PPI therapy (prokinetic, n = 12; placebo, n = 11) were investigated. At visit 1, ambulatory oesophageal manometry was performed, and peristaltic and simultaneous wave percentage and characteristics were measured. DGOR and pH measurements were also performed. After treatment with either the prokinetic cisapride or placebo, all investigations were repeated (visit 2). Analysis of covariance and Spearman's correlation coefficients of changes from visit 1 to visit 2 were used to compare data. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to DGOR, DGOR characteristics, or the percentage of peristalsis and simultaneous waves and their characteristics. There was no correlation between DGOR and motility changes. Although no significant differences existed between acid reflux in the two groups, five patients with high supine acid reflux showed a significant reduction after treatment with cisapride. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of cisapride to PPI treatment does not appear to improve oesophageal motility or reduce DGOR in patients with Barrett's oesophagus.

Randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic anterior versus posterior fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare the effect of laparoscopic anterior and posterior fundoplication on gastro-oesophageal reflux disease by means of a prospective randomized controlled trial. METHODS: One hundred and three patients were randomised to undergo either anterior (53) or posterior (50) fundoplication. Initial enrollment and subsequent clinical appointments were undertaken 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the procedure using a standardized questionnaire. Ambulatory pH monitoring and manometry were undertaken both preoperatively and at approximately 3 months post-procedure. RESULTS: The mean operating time was similar in both groups (48 versus 52 min). Two operations in each group were converted to open surgery. Post-operative dysphagia in the first month was higher in the posterior fundoplication group compared with the anterior group (at 1 month, P= 0.002; and at 3 months, P= 0.014). The number of individuals suffering from post-operative heartburn was greater in the anterior fundoplication group (at 1 month, P= 0.008; at 3 months, P < 0.001; and at 6 months, P= 0.002). Eight individuals required reoperation in the anterior group and two individuals in the posterior group (P= 0.057). CONCLUSION: Anterior and posterior fundoplication each have their advantages and disadvantages. There is an increased risk of early post-operative dysphagia after posterior fundoplication. Anterior fundoplication carries a greater risk of persistent or recurrent reflux. Overall, a posterior fundoplication produces a better management option for controlling gastro-oesophageal reflux disease when compared with an anterior fundoplication technique which utilizes unilateral fixation of the gastric fundus.