Laparoscopic pyloroplasty is a safe and effective first-line surgical therapy for refractory gastroparesis.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical options for symptomatic delayed gastric emptying include gastric stimulator implantation, subtotal gastrectomy, and pyloroplasty. Pyloroplasty has been shown to improve gastric emptying yet is seldom described as a primary treatment for gastroparesis. We present a single-institution experience of laparoscopic Heineke-Mikulicz pyloroplasty (LP) as treatment for gastroparesis. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: A prospective foregut surgery database was queried for LP over a 5-year period. Charts were reviewed for indications, complications, symptom score, and outcomes. Gastroparesis was defined by (1) abnormal gastric emptying study, (2) endoscopic visualization of retained food after prolonged NPO status, or (3) clinical symptoms suspicious of vagal nerve injury following complex re-operative foregut surgery. Results were analyzed using a paired T test and single-factor ANOVA. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-seven LP patients were identified and reviewed. One hundred and five had a concurrent fundoplication for objective reflux. There were no intraoperative complications or conversions to laparotomy. Overall morbidity rate was 6.8% with four return to OR and two confirmed leaks (1.1% leak rate). Average length of stay was 3.5 days, and readmission rate was 7%. Eighty-six percent had improvement in GES with normalization in 77%. Gastric emptying half-time decreased from 175 ± 94 to 91 ± 45 min. Nineteen patients (10.7%) had subsequent surgical interventions: gastric stimulator implantation (12), feeding jejunostomy and/or gastrostomy tube (6), or subtotal gastrectomy (4). Symptom severity scores for nausea, vomiting, bloating, abdominal pain, and early satiety decreased significantly at 3 months. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic pyloroplasty improves or normalizes gastric emptying in nearly 90% of gastroparesis patients with very low morbidity. It significantly improves symptoms of nausea, vomiting, bloating, and abdominal pain. Some patients may go on to another surgical treatment for GP, but it remains a safe and less invasive alternative to a subtotal gastrectomy in these clinically challenging patients.

Clinical Burden of Laparoscopic Feeding Jejunostomy Tubes.

INTRODUCTION: Feeding jejunostomies (J tubes) provide enteral nutrition when oral and gastric routes are not options. Despite their prevalence, there is a paucity of literature regarding their efficacy and clinical burden. METHODS: All laparoscopic J tubes placed over a 5-year period were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical burden was measured by number of clinical contact events (tube-related clinic visits, phone calls, ED visits) and morbidity (dislodgement, clogging, tube fracture, infection, other). Tube replacements were also recorded. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one patients were included. Fifty-nine percent had associated malignancy, and 35 % were placed for nutritional prophylaxis. Mean time to J tube removal was 146 days. J tubes were expected to be temporary in >90 % but only 50 % had sufficient oral intake for removal. Tubes were removed prematurely due to patient intolerance in 8 %. Mortality was 0 %. Morbidity was 51 % and included clogging (12 %), tube fracture (16 %), dislodgement (25 %), infection (18 %) and "other" (leaking, erosion, etc.) in 17 %. The median number of adverse events per J tube was 2(0-8). Mean number of clinic phone calls was 2.5(0-22), ED visits 0.5(0-7), and clinic visits 1.4(0-13), with 82 % requiring more than one J tube-related clinic visit. Unplanned replacements occurred in 40 %. CONCLUSION: While necessary for some patients, J tubes are associated with high clinical burden.