Fundoplication in laparoscopic Heller's cardiomyotomy for achalasia.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic Heller's cardiomyotomy (LHC) is the preferred treatment of achalasia. It improves dysphagia by dividing muscles of the lower oesophageal sphincter, but this intervention can result in debilitating gastro-oesophageal reflux symptoms in some patients. To prevent these reflux symptoms, most surgeons add a fundoplication to Heller's cardiomyotomy, but there is no consensus regarding this or the type of fundoplication which is best suited for the purpose. OBJECTIVES: To assess how the addition of a fundoplication affects postoperative reflux and dysphagia in people undergoing LHC and compare the different types of fundoplications used in combination with LHC to determine which is better at controlling reflux without worsening the dysphagia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched three databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase) on 31 October 2021 and trial registers to identify all published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in any language, comparing different fundoplications used in combination with LHC to treat achalasia. We also included RCTs where LHC with a fundoplication is compared with LHC without any fundoplication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We only included RCTs which recruited adult participants with achalasia undergoing LHC with minimal hiatal dissection. We excluded non-randomised studies or studies involving paediatric participants. We also excluded studies where the procedure was done by open surgery and where circumferential hiatal dissection of the oesophagus was carried out, unless it was necessary to reduce a hiatus hernia or to facilitate a Toupet or Nissen fundoplication. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently identified studies to be included, assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 1 tool, and extracted the data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effect models with Review Manager (RevMan) software. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight studies in this review, with a total of 571 participants with an average age of 45 years (range 33.5 to 50). LHC without any fundoplication was performed in 65 (11.3%) participants, 298 (52.1%) had Dor fundoplication, 81 (14.1%) had Toupet fundoplication, 72 (12.6%) had Nissen's fundoplication, and 55 (9.6%) participants had angle of His accentuation. Three studies with a total of 143 participants compared LHC + Dor to LHC without fundoplication. We found that the evidence is very uncertain as to whether the addition of a Dor fundoplication made any difference to the outcome of postoperative pathological acid reflux (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.89; I2 = 56%; 2 studies, 97 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and uncertain for severe postoperative dysphagia (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.34 to 26.33; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 142 participants; low-certainty evidence). Three studies with 174 participants compared LHC + Dor to LHC + Toupet. The evidence suggests that there may be little to no difference in the outcomes of postoperative pathological acid reflux (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.43; I2 = 60%; 3 studies, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence) and severe postoperative dysphagia (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.19 to 3.15; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 123 participants; low-certainty evidence) between the two interventions, but the certainty of the evidence is low. One study with 138 participants compared LHC + Dor to LHC + Nissen. Nissen fundoplication caused increased severe postoperative dysphagia (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.83; 1 study, 138 participants; high-certainty evidence) when compared to Dor fundoplication. This study did not show a difference in postoperative pathological acid reflux (RR 4.72, 95% CI 0.23 to 96.59; 1 study, 138 participants; low-certainty evidence), but the certainty of evidence is low. One study with 110 participants compared LHC + Dor with LCH + angle of His accentuation, and reported that severe postoperative dysphagia was similar between the two interventions (RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.27 to 8.95; 1 study, 110 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), with moderate certainty of evidence. This study did not report on postoperative pathological acid reflux. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: When LHC was performed with minimal hiatal dissection, we were very uncertain whether the addition of a Dor fundoplication made a difference in controlling postoperative reflux, and we were uncertain if it increased the risk of severe postoperative dysphagia. There may be little to no difference in the outcomes of postoperative pathological acid reflux or severe dysphagia between Dor and Toupet fundoplications when used in combination with LHC, but the certainty of the evidence is low. Nissen (total) fundoplication used in combination with LHC for achalasia increased the risk of severe postoperative dysphagia. The angle of His accentuation and Dor fundoplication had a similar effect on severe postoperative dysphagia when combined with LHC, but their effect on postoperative pathological acid reflux was not reported.

Re-interventions and re-admissions in a 13-year series following use of laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy (LSTC) without cystic duct ligation is an alternative to conversion to open surgery in a difficult cholecystectomy, thus avoiding a potentially hazardous dissection in Calot's triangle. The long-term outcomes of this procedure are not well reported. The aim of this study is to assess the rates of re-presentation, re-admissions, endoscopic interventions and completion cholecystectomy in patients who have undergone LSTC. METHODS: Details of all patients undergoing cholecystectomy over a 13-year period (2003-2015) were entered on a prospective database. Further information on subsequent hospital attendances, biliary imaging, endoscopic interventions and re-operations following the index LSTC was collected retrospectively from hospital database. RESULTS: Overall, 2313 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Eighty-five patients (3.7%) underwent LSTC and the rest had standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A controlled bile leak was observed in 16 (19%) patients post-operatively, of which 3 resolved spontaneously. The remaining 13 were managed with an early endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and biliary stent. Twenty-seven patients (32%), who underwent LSTC, were re-investigated for the upper abdominal symptoms. The time range for re-investigation was 21 days-124 months. Eight patients underwent ERCP post-discharge, for suspected bile duct stones on radiological imaging. Two patients required open completion cholecystectomy for symptomatic stones in the gallbladder remnant. CONCLUSION: LSTC is a feasible and safe alternative to open surgery with acceptable long-term consequences and re-interventions.

Comparison of Two Types of Liver Retractors in Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Morbid Obesity.

BACKGROUND: Retraction of the left lobe of the liver is an important step in most bariatric surgical procedures. Bariatric patients may have enlarged, fatty livers and retraction can be complicated with injuries, haematoma, or necrosis. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of two standard liver retractors, Nathanson and PretzelFlex on patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing LRYGB in our center from April 2017 to January 2019 were analysed. The type of retractor used was dependent on the surgeon's preference and the availability of instruments. Patients were divided into two groups, based on the type of liver retraction device used. Each group was assessed and compared for postoperative pain score, presence of nausea or vomiting, blood test results (liver function tests and C-reactive protein), and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: LRYGB was performed on 167 patients in which Nathanson was used in 93 patients and PretzelFlex in 74 patients. The duration of surgery was similar in both groups. Alanine transaminase (ALT) levels and C-reactive protein (CRP) were significantly higher in the group where Nathanson's retractor was used. The postoperative pain score and length of stay were also higher when Nathanson's retractor was used but it did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The PretzelFlex liver retractor causes significantly less measurable liver damage and is associated with less postoperative pain and nausea when compared with Nathanson's retractor.

Laparoscopic versus open transhiatal oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the preferred treatment for resectable oesophageal cancers, and can be performed in different ways. Transhiatal oesophagectomy (oesophagectomy without thoracotomy, with a cervical anastomosis) is one way to resect oesophageal cancers. It can be performed laparoscopically or by open method. With other organs, laparoscopic surgery has been shown to reduce complications and length of hospital stay compared to open surgery. However, concerns remain about the safety of laparoscopic transhiatal oesophagectomy in terms of post-operative complications and oncological clearance compared with open transhiatal oesophagectomy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of laparoscopic versus open oesophagectomy for people with oesophageal cancer undergoing transhiatal oesophagectomy. SEARCH METHODS: We electronically searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and trials registers until August 2015. We also searched the references of included trials to identify further trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies comparing laparoscopic with open transhiatal oesophagectomy in patients with resectable oesophageal cancer, regardless of language, blinding, or publication status for the review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently identified trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), using both fixed-effect and random-effects models, with RevMan 5, based on intention-to-treat analyses. MAIN RESULTS: We found no randomised controlled trials on this topic. We included six non-randomised studies (five retrospective) that compared laparoscopic versus open transhiatal oesophagectomy (334 patients: laparoscopic = 154 patients; open = 180 patients); five studies (326 patients: laparoscopic = 151 patients; open = 175 patients) provided information for one or more outcomes. Most studies included a mixture of adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma and different stages of oesophageal cancer, without metastases. All the studies were at unclear or high risk of bias; the overall quality of evidence was very low for all the outcomes.The differences between laparoscopic and open transhiatal oesophagectomy were imprecise for short-term mortality (laparoscopic = 0/151 (adjusted proportion based on meta-analysis estimate: 0.5%) versus open = 2/175 (1.1%); RR 0.44; 95% CI 0.05 to 4.09; participants = 326; studies = 5; I² = 0%); long-term mortality (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.16; participants = 193; studies = 2; I² = 0%); anastomotic stenosis (laparoscopic = 4/36 (11.1%) versus open = 3/37 (8.1%); RR 1.37; 95% CI 0.33 to 5.70; participants = 73; studies = 1); short-term recurrence (laparoscopic = 1/16 (6.3%) versus open = 0/4 (0%); RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.04 to 18.47; participants = 20; studies = 1); long-term recurrence (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.84 to 1.18; participants = 173; studies = 2); proportion of people who required blood transfusion (laparoscopic = 0/36 (0%) versus open = 6/37 (16.2%); RR 0.08; 95% CI 0.00 to 1.35; participants = 73; studies = 1); proportion of people with positive resection margins (laparoscopic = 15/102 (15.8%) versus open = 27/111 (24.3%); RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.12; participants = 213; studies = 3; I² = 0%); and the number of lymph nodes harvested during surgery (median difference between the groups varied from 12 less to 3 more lymph nodes in the laparoscopic compared to the open group; participants = 326; studies = 5).The proportion of patients with serious adverse events was lower in the laparoscopic group (10/99, (10.3%) compared to the open group = 24/114 (21.1%); RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.99; participants = 213; studies = 3; I² = 0%); as it was for adverse events in the laparoscopic group = 37/99 (39.9%) versus the open group = 71/114 (62.3%); RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.86; participants = 213; studies = 3; I² = 0%); and the median lengths of hospital stay were significantly less in the laparoscopic group than the open group (three days less in all three studies that reported this outcome; number of participants = 266). There was lack of clarity as to whether the median difference in the quantity of blood transfused was statistically significant favouring laparoscopic oesophagectomy in the only study that reported this information. None of the studies reported post-operative dysphagia, health-related quality of life, time-to-return to normal activity (return to pre-operative mobility without caregiver support), or time-to-return to work. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are currently no randomised controlled trials comparing laparoscopic with open transhiatal oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancers. In observational studies, laparoscopic transhiatal oesophagectomy is associated with fewer overall complications and shorter hospital stays than open transhiatal oesophagectomy. However, this association is unlikely to be causal. There is currently no information to determine a causal association in the differences between the two surgical approaches. Randomised controlled trials comparing laparoscopic transhiatal oesophagectomy with other methods of oesophagectomy are required to determine the optimal method of oesophagectomy.

Hepatic tuberculosis--a case report.

Though abdominal tuberculosis is fairly common in our country, incidence of tuberculous hepatitis is rare. The authors reported a case who presented to the surgical OPD of the NRS Medical College, Calcutta with complaints of right upper quadrant abdominal pain, flatulent dyspepsia, nausea and occasional vomiting. Ultrasonography (USG) revealed fibrotic gall bladder without any calculus suggesting chronic acalculus cholecystitis. On exploration of the abdomen, the gall bladder was found to be fibrotic and thickened without any calculus. Multiple scarred nodules of different sizes were found in the liver. Cholecystectomy was done and a scarring nodule from the liver was taken for histopathological examination which revealed a tuberculous granuloma. Histopathology of the gall bladder showed cholesterosis. The patient responded to antituberculous drugs.