We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Repair of Paraesophageal Hiatal Hernias—Is a Fundoplication Needed? A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial.
Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2015 August
BACKGROUND: The need for a fundoplication during repair of paraesophageal hiatal hernias (PEH) remains unclear. Prevention of gastroesophageal reflux represents a trade-off against the risk of fundoplication-related side effects. The aim of this trial was to compare laparoscopic mesh-augmented hiatoplasty with simple cardiophrenicopexy (LMAH-C) with laparoscopic mesh-augmented hiatoplasty with fundoplication (LMAH-F) in patients with PEH.
STUDY DESIGN: The study was designed as a patient- and assessor-blinded randomized controlled pilot trial, registration number: DRKS00004492 (www.germanctr.de/). Patients with symptomatic PEH were eligible and assigned by central randomization to LMAH-C or LMAH-F. Endpoints were postoperative gastroesophageal reflux, complications, and quality of life 12 months postoperatively.
RESULTS: Forty patients (9 male, 31 female) were randomized. Patients were well matched for baseline characteristics. At 3 months, the DeMeester score was higher after LMAH-C compared with LMAH-F (40.9 ± 39.9 vs. 9.6 ± 17; p = 0.048). At 12 months, the reflux syndrome score was higher after LMAH-C compared with LMAH-F (1.9 ± 1.2 vs. 1.1 ± 0.4; p = 0.020). In 53% of LMAH-C patients and 17% of LMAH-F patients, postoperative esophagitis was present (p = 0.026). Values of dysphagia (2.1 ± 1.6 vs 1.9 ± 1.4; p = 0.737), gas bloating (2.6 ± 1.4 vs 2.8 ± 1.4; p = 0.782), and quality of life (116.0 ± 16.2 vs 115.9 ± 15.8; p = 0.992) were similar. Relevant postoperative complications occurred in 4 (10%) patients and did not differ between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic repair of PEH should be combined with a fundoplication to avoid postoperative gastroesophageal reflux and resulting esophagitis. Fundoplication-related side effects do not appear to be clinically relevant. Multicenter randomized trials are required to confirm these findings.
STUDY DESIGN: The study was designed as a patient- and assessor-blinded randomized controlled pilot trial, registration number: DRKS00004492 (www.germanctr.de/). Patients with symptomatic PEH were eligible and assigned by central randomization to LMAH-C or LMAH-F. Endpoints were postoperative gastroesophageal reflux, complications, and quality of life 12 months postoperatively.
RESULTS: Forty patients (9 male, 31 female) were randomized. Patients were well matched for baseline characteristics. At 3 months, the DeMeester score was higher after LMAH-C compared with LMAH-F (40.9 ± 39.9 vs. 9.6 ± 17; p = 0.048). At 12 months, the reflux syndrome score was higher after LMAH-C compared with LMAH-F (1.9 ± 1.2 vs. 1.1 ± 0.4; p = 0.020). In 53% of LMAH-C patients and 17% of LMAH-F patients, postoperative esophagitis was present (p = 0.026). Values of dysphagia (2.1 ± 1.6 vs 1.9 ± 1.4; p = 0.737), gas bloating (2.6 ± 1.4 vs 2.8 ± 1.4; p = 0.782), and quality of life (116.0 ± 16.2 vs 115.9 ± 15.8; p = 0.992) were similar. Relevant postoperative complications occurred in 4 (10%) patients and did not differ between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic repair of PEH should be combined with a fundoplication to avoid postoperative gastroesophageal reflux and resulting esophagitis. Fundoplication-related side effects do not appear to be clinically relevant. Multicenter randomized trials are required to confirm these findings.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app