Short-term results of laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery with the RefluxStop device in patients with gastro-esophageal reflux disease and ineffective esophageal motility.

PURPOSE: In gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) requiring surgical treatment, concomitant ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is a decisive factor in surgical planning, due to concern regarding dysphagia. Anti-reflux surgery with the RefluxStop device is a promising technique. We assessed initial feasibility and clinical outcomes of RefluxStop surgery in patients with GERD and IEM. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with GERD, hiatal hernia (HH), and IEM, who underwent surgery with RefluxStop at our institution and achieved 12-month follow-up. Technique feasibility was assessed, in addition to symptom resolution (GERD-HRQL questionnaire), adverse events, HH recurrence, dysphagia, and patient satisfaction. Placement of the device was confirmed by video fluoroscopy on postoperative day 1, and at 3 and 12 months. RESULTS: Between June 2020 and November 2022, 20 patients with IEM underwent surgery with RefluxStop and completed 12-month follow-up. All patients reported typical symptoms of GERD, and 12 had preoperative dysphagia. The median HH length was 4.5 cm (IQR, 3.75-5). The median operating time was 59.5 min (IQR, 50.25-64) with no implant-related intra- or postoperative complications. No HH recurrence was observed. One patient reported persistent left-sided thoracic pain at 11 months post-surgery, which required diagnostic laparoscopy and adhesiolysis. Three patients reported severe postoperative dysphagia: balloon dilatation was performed towards resolution. The mean GERD-HRQL scores improved (from 40.7 at baseline to 4.8 at 3 months and 5.7 at 12 months (p <0.001)). CONCLUSION: RefluxStop surgery was feasible and offered effective treatment for this group of patients with GERD and IEM. All patients had complete resolution or significant improvement of GERD symptoms, and 90% of them were satisfied with their quality of life 1 year after surgery.

Counter-regulatory responses to postprandial hypoglycaemia in patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia vs surgical and non-surgical control individuals.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Post-bariatric hypoglycaemia is an increasingly recognised complication of bariatric surgery, manifesting particularly after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. While hyperinsulinaemia is an established pathophysiological feature, the role of counter-regulation remains unclear. We aimed to assess counter-regulatory hormones and glucose fluxes during insulin-induced postprandial hypoglycaemia in patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass vs surgical and non-surgical control individuals. METHODS: In this case-control study, 32 adults belonging to four groups with comparable age, sex and BMI (patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy and non-surgical control individuals) underwent a postprandial hypoglycaemic clamp in our clinical research unit to reach the glycaemic target of 2.5 mmol/l 150-170 min after ingesting 15 g of glucose. Glucose fluxes were assessed during the postprandial and hypoglycaemic period using a dual-tracer approach. The primary outcome was the incremental AUC of glucagon during hypoglycaemia. Catecholamines, cortisol, growth hormone, pancreatic polypeptide and endogenous glucose production were also analysed during hypoglycaemia. RESULTS: The rate of glucose appearance after oral administration, as well as the rates of total glucose appearance and glucose disappearance, were higher in both Roux-en-Y gastric bypass groups vs the non-surgical control group in the early postprandial period (all p<0.05). During hypoglycaemia, glucagon exposure was significantly lower in all surgical groups vs the non-surgical control group (all p<0.01). Pancreatic polypeptide levels were significantly lower in patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia vs the non-surgical control group (median [IQR]: 24.7 [10.9, 38.7] pmol/l vs 238.7 [186.3, 288.9] pmol/l) (p=0.005). Other hormonal responses to hypoglycaemia and endogenous glucose production did not significantly differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The glucagon response to insulin-induced postprandial hypoglycaemia is lower in post-bariatric surgery individuals compared with non-surgical control individuals, irrespective of the surgical modality. No significant differences were found between patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia and surgical control individuals, suggesting that impaired counter-regulation is not a root cause of post-bariatric hypoglycaemia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04334161.

Gastric electric stimulator versus gastrectomy for the treatment of medically refractory gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) are known therapeutic options for medically refractory gastroparesis (MRG) although there are limited data comparing their outcomes. We aim to compare clinical outcomes between patients undergoing GES vs upfront LG for the treatment of MRG while examining factors associated with GES failure and conversion to LG. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 181 consecutive patients who underwent GES or LG for MRG at our institution from January 2003 to December 2017. Data collection consisted of chart review and follow-up telephone survey. Statistical analysis utilized Chi-squared, ANOVA, and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 130 (72%) patients underwent GES and 51 (28%) LG as primary intervention. GES patients were more likely to have diabetic gastroparesis (GES 67% vs LG 39%, p < 0.001), while primary LG patients were more likely to have post-surgical gastroparesis (GES 5% vs LG 43%, p < 0.001). Postoperatively, primary LG patients had higher rates of major in-hospital morbidity events (GES 5% vs LG 18%, p = 0.017) and longer hospital stays (GES 3 vs LG 9 days, p < 0.001). However, over a mean 35-month follow-up period, there were no differences in the rates of major morbidity, readmissions, or mortality. Multivariable regression analysis revealed patients undergoing GES as a primary intervention were less likely to report improvement in symptoms on follow-up compared to primary LG patients OR 0.160 (95% CI 0.048-0.532). Additionally, patients who converted to LG from GES were more likely to have post-surgical gastroparesis as the primary etiology. CONCLUSION: GES as a first-line surgical treatment of MRG was associated with worse outcomes compared to LG. Post-surgical etiology was associated with an increased likelihood of GES failure, and in such patients, upfront gastrectomy may be a superior alternative to GES. Further studies are needed to determine patient selection for operative treatment of MRG.

Short-term outcomes of endoscopic gastro-jejunal revisions for treatment of dumping syndrome after Roux-En-Y gastric bypass.

BACKGROUND: Dumping syndrome is a known long-term complication of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Most cases can be avoided with dietary and lifestyle changes. Severe dumping is characterized by multiple daily episodes with significant impact on quality-of-life. As dumping correlates with rapid pouch emptying through a dilated gastro-jejunal anastomosis (GJA), the aim was to assess endoscopic gastro-jejunal revisions (EGR) regarding feasibility, safety, and outcome. METHODS: From January 2016 to August 2018, we reviewed the electronic records of all patients with dumping syndrome undergoing EGR with the Apollo OverStitch suturing device (Apollo Endosurgery, Austin, Texas, USA). Demographics, procedure details, and outcome variables were recorded. Sigstad questionnaire was administered before and after surgery to assess symptomatic response. RESULTS: There were 40 patients (M:F = 13:27) treated with EGR for dumping. Mean procedure time was 18.5 min (12-41) with a median number of 1 suture (range 1-3) used. Mean anastomotic diameter was 22.6 mm (R 18-35) at the beginning and 6.2 mm (R 4-13) at the end of the procedure, with 100% technical success in narrowing the GJA. There were no intra-operative or 30-day complications. Repeat EGR was required in 9 patients (22.5%) for persistent/recurrent dumping. Two patients (5%) required a laparoscopic pouch revision. For patients with minimum 1-month follow-up who were treated only endoscopically, 33/37 (89.2%) had improved or resolved symptoms during the follow-up period. Mean follow-up time was 12.5 months (R1-33.8). Survey responses were available for 25/34 (73.5%) patients. Mean Sigstad score decreased from 13.9 (R 0-28) pre-operatively to 8.6 (R 0-28) after EGR. CONCLUSION: EGR of the dilated GJA is a highly effective treatment option for dumping syndrome after RYGB. Due to its endoluminal approach, it is a feasible and safe procedure, and effective for immediate symptom resolution in most patients. In some patients, repeat narrowing of the anastomosis is necessary for the maintenance of symptom resolution.

Hiatal hernia recurrence following magnetic sphincter augmentation and posterior cruroplasty: intermediate-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: We have previously reported short-term outcomes after hiatal hernia repair (HHR) at the time of magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Here we report intermediate-term outcomes and hernia recurrence rate after concomitant MSA and HHR. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent repair of a hiatal hernia 3 cm or larger at the time of MSA implantation between May 2009 and December 2015. The primary endpoint was hiatal hernia recurrence identified by routine postoperative videoesophagography or endoscopy. Recurrence was defined by a 2 cm or greater upward displacement of the stomach through the diaphragmatic esophageal hiatus. Secondary endpoints included cessation of proton-pump inhibitor (PPI), persistent dysphagia requiring intervention, and GERD health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) scores 1 year from surgery. RESULTS: During the study period, 47 of 53 (89%) patients underwent concomitant MSA with HHR and complied with surveillance. Hiatal hernias ranged from 3 to 7 cm (mean 4 ± 1). Mean clinical follow-up time was 19 months (range 1-39). GERD-HRQL score decreased from 20.3 to 3.1 (p < .001), 89% of patients remained off PPIs, and 97% of patients reported improvement or resolution of symptoms. Two recurrent hiatal hernias were identified on surveillance imaging for a recurrence rate of 4.3% at a mean 18 (± 10) months after initial operation. Persistent dysphagia occurred in 13% (6/47) over the first year, which resolved after a single balloon dilation in 67% (4/6). Two patients elected for device removal due to dilation-refractory dysphagia and persistent reflux symptoms. CONCLUSION: Concomitant magnetic sphincter augmentation and hiatal hernia repair in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease and a moderate-sized hiatal hernia demonstrates durable subjective reflux control and an acceptable hiatal hernia recurrence rate at 1- to 2-year follow-up.

Gastric cancer in the young: An advanced disease with poor prognostic features.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Gastric cancer in young patients is rare. We analyzed the clinicopathological features and prognosis of early-onset gastric carcinoma. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with gastric adenocarcinoma aged ≤45 years and >45 years at our institution over a 17-year period. Clinicopathological features were compared and survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: A total of 121 patients with gastric carcinoma aged ≤45 years were identified. The young group (YG) had a higher incidence of stage III/IV disease (86.8% vs. 57.9%, P < 0.001), poorly-differentiated carcinoma (95.9% vs. 74.4%, P < 0.001), and signet-cell type tumor (88.4% vs. 32.2%, P < 0.001) relative to the older group (OG). The majority of tumors were in the middle third of the stomach in both groups (P = 0.108). Three-year survival in the YG was 87.1%, 32.2%, and 6.9% in stage I/II, III, and IV disease, respectively. Surgical intervention in young patients with advanced carcinoma was not associated with improved survival. Although median survival was shorter in the YG compared to the OG (11.7 vs. 41.0 months, P < 0.001), stage-specific survival was similar. CONCLUSION: Early-onset gastric cancer demonstrates advanced stage of disease, and a high incidence of poorly-differentiated and signet-cell type carcinoma. Overall survival is poor with no added benefit to surgical intervention in advanced disease.

Efficacy of magnetic sphincter augmentation in patients with large hiatal hernias.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) has demonstrated long-term safety and efficacy in the treatment of patients with gastroesophageal reflux (GERD), but its efficacy in patients with large hiatal hernias has yet to be proven. The aim of our study was to assess outcomes of MSA in patients with hiatal hernias ≥3 cm. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent MSA at our institutions over a 6-year period. Information obtained consisted of patient demographics, symptoms of GERD, preoperative GERD Health-Related Quality-of-Life (HRQL) scores, perioperative details, and implantation of the MSA device. Primary endpoints included postoperative GERD-HRQL scores, proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) use, symptom change, and procedure-related complications. A large hiatal hernia was defined as a hernia measuring ≥3 cm by intraoperative measurement. RESULTS: A total of 192 patients were reviewed. Median follow-up was 20 months (3-75 months). Mean GERD-HRQL scores in the overall population before and after MSA were 18.9 and 5.0, respectively (p < 0.001). In the majority of patients symptoms improved or resolved (N = 177, p < 0.001). Fifty-two patients (27.0 %) had a hiatal hernia ≥3 cm (range 3-7 cm). Their mean GERD-HRQL score decreased from 20.5 to 3.6 (p < 0.001) following MSA. When compared to patients with smaller hernias, patients with large hiatal hernias had decreased postoperative PPI requirement (9.6 vs. 26.6 %, p = 0.011) and lower mean postoperative GERD-HRQL scores (3.6 vs. 5.6, p = 0.027). The percent of patients requiring postoperative intervention for dysphagia was similar (13.5 vs. 17.9 %, p = 0.522), as was the incidence of symptom resolution or improvement (98.1 vs. 91.3 %, p = 0.118). CONCLUSION: MSA in patients with large hiatal hernias demonstrates decreased postoperative PPI requirement and mean GERD-HRQL scores compared to patients with smaller hernias. The incidence of symptom resolution or improvement and the percentage of patients requiring intervention for dysphagia are similar. Short-term outcomes of MSA are encouraging in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease and large hiatal hernias.

Intraoperative assessment of the effects of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy on the distensibility of the lower esophageal sphincter using impedance planimetry.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has emerged as an effective weight-loss procedure for morbid obesity that is also effective for treating comorbidities such as diabetes. However, it has been associated with the development of GERD postoperatively. The pathophysiology of post-LSG GERD is unknown, and current studies have shown conflicting results. The aim of our study is to shed light on this issue by investigating the effect of LSG on the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) function and the relationship of LES function to GERD symptoms. METHODS: A prospective study of patients undergoing LSG from 10/2013 to 8/2014 at a single academic tertiary referral center was carried out. Patients undergoing a concomitant procedure such as hiatal hernia repair or laparoscopic gastric band removal were excluded. Distensibility of the LES was measured after pneumoperitoneum and after LSG. Baseline GERD-HRQL was obtained with follow-up GERD-HRQL and weight at 3 and 6 months. The primary outcomes measured were LES distensibility and GERD-HRQL scores after LSG. Our secondary outcome was a correlation between LES distensibility and GERD-HRQL scores after LSG. RESULTS: Fifteen subjects were enrolled (5M/10F). Mean age was 51 years (30-71 years), and mean BMI 45 kg/m2 (30-58). We were able to obtain follow-up data for all patients at 3 months. Mean LES distensibility increased from 1.2 before LSG to 2.2 after LSG (p = 0.017). Median GERD-HRQL was 0 before LSG and remained essentially negative at 1 and 0 (3 and 6 months postoperatively, respectively). Three (27 %) of the patients had de novo GERD at 3 months following LSG. One (25 %) patient had remission of GERD. There was no correlation between LES distensibility and GERD symptoms. CONCLUSION: While LSG weakens the LES immediately, it does not predictably affect postoperative GERD symptoms; therefore, distensibility is not the only factor affecting development of postoperative GERD, confirming the multifactorial nature of post-LSG GERD.

Charges, outcomes, and complications: a comparison of magnetic sphincter augmentation versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for the treatment of GERD.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is approved for uncomplicated GERD. Multiple studies have shown MSA to compare favorably to laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) in terms of symptom control with results out to 5 years. The MSA device itself, however, is an added cost to an anti-reflux surgery, and direct cost comparison studies have not been done between MSA and LNF. The aim of the study was to compare charges, complications, and outcome of MSA versus LNF at 1 year. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent MSA or LNF for the treatment of GERD between January 2010 and June 2013. Patient charges were collected for the surgical admission. We also collected data on 30-day complications and symptom control at 1 year assessed by GERD-HRQL score and PPI use. RESULTS: There were 119 patients included in the study, 52 MSA and 67 LNF. There was no significant difference between the mean charges for MSA and LNF ($48,491 vs. $50,111, p = 0.506). There were significant differences in OR time (66 min MSA vs. 82 min LNF, p < 0.01) and LOS (17 h MSA vs. 38 h LNF, p < 0.01). At 1-year follow-up, mean GERD-HRQL was 4.3 for MSA versus 5.1 for LNF (p = 0.47) and 85 % of MSA patients versus 92 % of LNF patients were free from PPIs (p = 0.37). MSA patients reported less gas bloat symptoms (23 vs. 53 %, p ≤ 0.01) and inability to belch (10 vs. 36 %, p ≤ 0.01) and vomit (4 vs. 19 %, p ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSION: The side effect profile of MSA is better than LNF as evidenced by less gas bloat and increase ability to belch and vomit. LNF and MSA are comparable in symptom control, safety, and overall hospital charges. The charge for the MSA device is offset by less charges in other categories as a result of the shorter operative time and LOS.

Multi-institutional outcomes using magnetic sphincter augmentation versus Nissen fundoplication for chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) has emerged as an alternative surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The safety and efficacy of MSA has been previously demonstrated, although adequate comparison to Nissen fundoplication (NF) is lacking, and required to validate the role of MSA in GERD management. METHODS: A multi-institutional retrospective cohort study of patients with GERD undergoing either MSA or NF. Comparisons were made at 1 year for the overall group and for a propensity-matched group. RESULTS: A total of 415 patients (201 MSA and 214 NF) underwent surgery. The groups were similar in age, gender, and GERD-HRQL scores but significantly different in preoperative obesity (32 vs. 40 %), dysphagia (27 vs. 39 %), DeMeester scores (34 vs. 39), presence of microscopic Barrett's (18 vs. 31 %) and hiatal hernia (55 vs. 69 %). At a minimum of 1-year follow-up, 354 patients (169 MSA and 185 NF) had significant improvement in GERD-HRQL scores (pre to post: 21-3 and 19-4). MSA patients had greater ability to belch (96 vs. 69 %) and vomit (95 vs. 43 %) with less gas bloat (47 vs. 59 %). Propensity-matched cases showed similar GERD-HRQL scores and the differences in ability to belch or vomit, and gas bloat persisted in favor of MSA. Mild dysphagia was higher for MSA (44 vs. 32 %). Resumption of daily PPIs was higher for MSA (24 vs. 12, p = 0.02) with similar patient-reported satisfaction rates. CONCLUSIONS: MSA for uncomplicated GERD achieves similar improvements in quality of life and symptomatic relief, with fewer side effects, but lower PPI elimination rates when compared to propensity-matched NF cases. In appropriate candidates, MSA is a valid alternative surgical treatment for GERD management.

Outcomes following laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Most published minimally invasive esophagectomy techniques involve a multiple field approach, including laparoscopic and thoracoscopic esophageal mobilization. Laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy (LTE) should potentially reduce the complications associated with thoracotomy. This study aims to compare outcomes of LTE with open transhiatal esophagectomy (OTE) and en-bloc esophagectomy (EBE). METHODS: Retrospective chart review was performed on all patients who had an LTE for cancer between July 2008 and July 2012 at our institution. Data was compared with an historic cohort of patients who underwent OTE and EBE at the same institution from July 2002 to July 2008. RESULTS: There were 33 patients with LTE, compared with 60 patients with OTE and 139 with EBE. The presence of minor operative complications was similar (p = 0.36), but major complications were significantly less common in the LTE group (12, 23 and 33 %, respectively; p = 0.04). The median number of blood transfusions during hospitalization was significantly lower in the LTE group (0, 2.5 and 3, respectively; p = 0.005). Median tumor size was significantly smaller (1.5, 2.2, and 3 cm, respectively; p = 0.03), but the LTE group had a significantly higher percentage of patients with neoadjuvant treatment (39, 14 and 29 %, respectively; p = 0.008). Median lymph node yield for LTE was lower (24, 36 and 48, respectively; p < 0.0001), but the percentage of patients with positive nodes was similar (33, 33 and 39 %, respectively; p = 0.69). Mortality was equivalent among the groups (0, 2 and 4 %, respectively; p = 0.38). The median LOS for the LTE group was significantly lower (10, 13 and 15 days, respectively; p < 0.0001). Overall survival was not different between the three groups (p = 0.65), with median survival at 24 months of 70, 65 and 65 %, respectively. CONCLUSION: LTE can be performed safely with less major complications and shorter hospital stay than open esophagectomy. The reduced lymph-node harvest did not impact overall survival.

Biologic versus nonbiologic mesh in ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The current standard of treatment for most ventral hernias is a mesh-based repair. Little is known about the safety and efficacy of biologic versus nonbiologic grafts. A meta-analysis was performed to examine two primary outcomes: recurrence and wound complication rates. METHODS: Electronic databases and reference lists of relevant articles were systematically searched for all clinical trials and cohort studies published between January 1990 and January 2012. A total of eight retrospective studies, with 1,229 patients, were included in the final analysis. RESULTS: Biologic grafts had significantly fewer infectious wound complications (p < 0.00001). However, the recurrence rates of biologic and nonbiologic mesh were not different. In subgroup analysis, there was no difference in recurrence rates and wound complications between human-derived and porcine-derived biologic grafts. CONCLUSIONS: Use of biologic mesh for ventral hernia repair results in less infectious wound complications but similar recurrence rates compared to nonbiologic mesh. This supports the application of biologic mesh for ventral hernia repair in high-risk patients or patients with a previous history of wound infection only when the significant additional cost of these materials can be justified and synthetic mesh is considered inappropriate.

Laparoscopic Large Hiatal Hernia Repair With RefluxStop: Outcomes of Six Months Follow-up in Thirty Patients.

OBJECTIVE: The antireflux surgical technique with the RefluxStop device is one of the latest approaches to treating patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of this study was to assess the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic hiatal hernia (HH) repair with the RefluxStop device in patients with GERD and concurrent large HH (≥4 cm). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for the first 30 patients with a large HH who consented and underwent HH surgery with the RefluxStop device. The operative technique and outcomes were evaluated to assess safety and feasibility, HH recurrence, dysphagia, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Between May 2020 and April 2022, 30 patients underwent laparoscopic HH repair with the RefluxStop device. All patients had typical symptoms of GERD, such as heartburn and regurgitation, and 15 patients (50%) had preoperative dysphagia. Median HH size was 5 cm (interquartile range, 4 to 5). Median operating time was 56 minutes (interquartile range, 52 to 63), with no intra and postoperative complications related to the device. One patient required laparotomy due to adhesions and associated bleeding when accessing the abdomen. All patients had postoperative imaging (video fluoroscopy) on postoperative day 1 and at 3 months, confirming the correct location of the RefluxStop device. One patient (3.3%) needed postoperative balloon dilatation due to severe dysphagia. Reflux symptoms (heartburn and acid regurgitation) resolved significantly in all patients ( P < 0.001) at 6 months. One episode of recurrence of HH (3.3%) occurred during the follow-up period of 6 months. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the short-term safety and feasibility of laparoscopic HH repair with the RefluxStop device in patients with large HH, with a low rate of postoperative dysphagia and subsequent improvement or resolution of reflux symptoms in all patients.

Minimally invasive surgical approach for the treatment of gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: Gastroparesis is a chronic disorder resulting in decreased quality of life. The gastric electrical stimulator (GES) is an alternative to gastrectomy in patients with medically refractory gastroparesis. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of patients treated with the gastric stimulator versus patients treated with laparoscopic subtotal or total gastrectomy. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients who had surgical treatment of gastroparesis from January 2003 to January 2012. Postoperative outcomes were analyzed and symptoms were assessed with the Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI). RESULTS: There were 103 patients: 72 patients (26 male/46 female) with a GES, implanted either with laparoscopy (n = 20) or mini-incision (n = 52), and 31 patients (9 male/22 female) who underwent laparoscopic subtotal (n = 27), total (n = 1), or completion gastrectomy (n = 3). Thirty-day morbidity rate (8.3% vs. 23%, p = 0.06) and in-hospital mortality rate (2.7% vs. 3%, p = 1.00) were similar for GES and gastrectomy. There were 19 failures (26%) in the group of GES patients; of these, 13 patients were switched to a subtotal gastrectomy for persistent symptoms (morbidity rate 7.7%, mortality 0). In total, 57% of patients were treated with GES while only 43% had final treatment with gastrectomy. Of the GES group, 63% rated their symptoms as improved versus 87% in the primary gastrectomy group (p = 0.02). The patients who were switched from GES to secondary laparoscopic gastrectomy had 100% symptom improvement. The median total GCSI score did not show a difference between the procedures (p = 0.12). CONCLUSION: The gastric electrical stimulator is an effective treatment for medically refractory gastroparesis. Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy should also be considered as one of the primary surgical treatments for gastroparesis given the significantly higher rate of symptomatic improvement with acceptable morbidity and comparable mortality. Furthermore, the gastric stimulator patients who have no improvement of symptoms can be successfully treated by laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy.

Diaphragmatic relaxing incisions during laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia (PEH) repair is associated with an objective recurrence rate exceeding 50% at 5 years. Minimizing tension is a critical factor in preventing hernia recurrence. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of crural relaxing incisions in patients undergoing PEH repair. METHODS: Records were reviewed to identify patients who received a relaxing incision during laparoscopic PEH repair. The patients were followed by chest X-ray and videoesophagram at 3 months and then annually. RESULTS: From November 2010 to March 2013, 58 patients underwent PEH repair, and 15 patients received a relaxing incision to accomplish crural closure. The median age of the patients was 72 years (range 58-84 years). The relaxing incision was right-sided in 13 patients, left-sided in one patient, and bilateral in one patient. All the procedures were completed laparoscopically and included a fundoplication. Collis gastroplasty for a short esophagus was performed for 40% of the patients. No major complications occurred. During a median follow-up period of 4 months, one patient had an asymptomatic mildly elevated left hemidiaphragm, and one patient had a trivial recurrent hernia, as shown on esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). CONCLUSION: Crural tension likely contributes to the high recurrence rate noted with laparoscopic PEH repair. Relaxing incisions are safe and allow crural approximation. Advanced laparoscopic surgeons should be aware of this option when faced with a large hiatus in a patient with PEH.

Argon beam coagulation versus fibrin sealant for hemostasis following liver resection: a randomized study in a porcine model.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Bleeding from the raw liver surface represents a significant surgical complication after elective liver resection or hepatic trauma. The application of argon beam coagulation (ABC) has been proposed to improve hemostasis, but is associated with significant necrosis of the liver parenchyma. Topical hemostatic agents, i.e. fibrin sealant (FS), have also been recommended, yet the optimal management is under debate. This study compares the efficacy and safety of both methods following liver resection in an animal model. METHODOLOGY: Twenty pigs underwent liver resection, and were then randomized into ABC or FS group for treatment of raw liver surfaces. Intraoperative and postoperative parameters were studied. Animals were sacrificed at day 12, and extent of necrosis was assessed using a scoring system and morphometry. RESULTS: Intraoperative parameters did not show any significant difference between two groups except for shorter time of application in the FS group. Postoperatively, animals in the FS group showed significantly higher hemoglobin levels (p=0.0001). Histologically, FS showed a smaller depth of necrosis than ABC (p=0.022). CONCLUSIONS: The use of FS is superior to ABC for management of the raw liver surface after liver resection, in terms of application time, postoperative bleeding and the extent of liver tissue necrosis.

Day-to-day discrepancy in Bravo pH monitoring is related to the degree of deterioration of the lower esophageal sphincter and severity of reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: The Bravo capsule allows monitoring of esophageal acid exposure over a two-day period. Experience has shown that 24-32% of patients will have abnormal esophageal acid exposure detected on only one of the 2 days monitored. This variation has been explained by the effect of endoscopy and sedation. The aim of this study was to assess the day-to-day discrepancy following transnasal placement of the Bravo capsule without endoscopy or sedation and to determine factors related to this variability. METHODS: Bravo pH monitoring was performed by transnasal placement of the capsule in 310 patients. Patients were divided into groups based on the composite pH score: both days normal, both days abnormal and only one of the 2 days abnormal. Lower esophageal sphincter (LES) characteristics were compared between groups. RESULTS: Of the 310 patients evaluated, 60 (19%) showed a discrepancy between the 2 days. A total of 127 patients had a normal pH score on both days and 123 had an abnormal pH score on both days. Of the 60 patients with a discrepancy, 27 were abnormal the first day and 33 (55%) were abnormal the second day. Patients with abnormal esophageal acid exposure on both days had higher degrees of esophageal acid exposure and were more likely to have a defective LES compared to those with an abnormal score on only one day (35 vs. 83%, p=0.027). CONCLUSION: Patients with a discrepancy between days of Bravo pH monitoring have lower esophageal acid exposure. Variability between the 2 days represents early deterioration of the gastroesophageal barrier and indicates less advanced reflux disease.

Thoraco-abdominal pressure gradients during the phases of respiration contribute to gastroesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Exaggerated pressure fluctuation between the thorax and abdomen during exercise or with pulmonary disease may challenge the gastroesophageal barrier and allow reflux of gastric juice into the esophagus. The aim of this study was to investigate the pressure differentials in the region of the gastroesophageal junction to better understand the relationship between the thoraco-abdominal pressure gradient and the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) barrier function. METHODS: We reviewed the esophageal motility and 24-h pH studies in 151 patients with a manometrically normal lower esophageal sphincter who did not have pulmonary disease, history of anti-reflux surgery, hiatal hernia, or ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). Intra-abdominal gastric and intra-thoracic esophageal pressure fluctuations with respiration were measured and the thoraco-abdominal pressure gradients were calculated during both inspiratory and expiratory phases of the respiratory cycle. Predictive factors for an abnormal composite pH score were identified by multivariable analysis. RESULTS: An inspiratory thoraco-abdominal pressure gradient that was higher than the resting LES pressure was found in 27 patients. In 23 of these patients (85.2%) there was increased esophageal acid exposure (OR 13.5, 95% CI 4.4-41.8). An abnormal composite pH score was predicted by a high inspiratory thoraco-abdominal pressure gradient (P < 0.001), greater fluctuation between inspiratory and expiratory thoracic pressure (P = 0.023), lower LES resting pressure (P = 0.049) and a decreased residual pressure after a swallow induced relaxation (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The gastroesophageal barrier function of the LES can be overcome during times when the inspiratory thoraco-abdominal pressure gradient is increased, leading to reflux of gastric juice into the esophagus. This implies that exaggerated ventilatory effort, as occurs with exercise or in respiratory disease, can result in gastroesophageal reflux.

The impact of gastric distension on the lower esophageal sphincter and its exposure to acid gastric juice.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The lower esophageal sphincter (LES) in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease often has a low resting pressure and a short abdominal length. The mechanism by which this occurs is unknown. We hypothesize that gastric distension causes progressive effacement of the abdominal portion of the LES, exposing it to acid injury resulting in mucosal and sphincter damage. Our aim was to assess in normal subjects the effect of gastric distension on the LES length and pressure and its exposure to acid gastric juice. METHODS: Eleven asymptomatic volunteers had their LES length and pressure measured before and during gastric distension. The location of the pH step-up point (shift from gastric pH to a pH >4) was also measured before and after distension. RESULTS: Progressive gastric distension with air resulted in progressive shortening of LES (R = 0.89, P < 0.0001). After infusion of 750 cc of air there was a significant reduction in the median LES length from 4 to 2.6 cm (P = 0.001). This change occurred in the abdominal length of the LES (2.6-1.4 cm [P = 0.001]) and not in the thoracic length. At rest the pH step-up point was 0.5 cm above the lower border of the LES and with distension moved a median of 1 cm cephalad within the LES. Simultaneously with the loss of length there was a reduction in LES pressure (27.4-23.4 mm Hg, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Gastric distension causes progressive shortening of the abdominal length of the LES and a reduction in its pressure. The process exposes the effaced mucosa and sphincter to acid gastric juice.

Esophageal intraepithelial eosinophils in dysphagic patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) often complain of dysphagia and are frequently found to have intraepithelial eosinophils on esophageal biopsy. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between dysphagia and the number of intraepithelial eosinophils in patients with GERD. METHODS: Review of all patients studied in our esophageal function laboratory from 1999 to 2007 identified 1,533 patients with increased esophageal acid exposure. Patients who complained of dysphagia without mechanical or motor causes were identified and divided into three groups based on whether dysphagia was their primary, secondary or tertiary symptom. A control group consisted of randomly selected GERD patients with no dysphagia. The highest number of intraepithelial eosinophils per high-power field (HPF) in biopsies from the squamocolumnar junction (SCJ) and esophageal body was compared across groups. RESULTS: There were 71 patients with unexplained dysphagia. Dysphagia was the primary symptom in 13 (18%), secondary symptom in 34 (48%), and tertiary symptom in 24 (34%) patients. The number of eosinophils differed between the four groups, with the highest number in those with dysphagia as the primary symptom (P = 0.0007). This relationship persisted whether biopsies were from the SCJ (P = 0.0057) or esophageal body (P = 0.0096). CONCLUSION: An association exists between the number of intraepithelial eosinophils and dysphagia in GERD patients, with the highest number of eosinophils in those with the primary symptom of dysphagia.