Laparoscopic Anterior 180-Degree Versus Nissen Fundoplication for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

*Discipline of Surgery, University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville South, South Australia †Department of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH ‡Flinders University Department of Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, South Australia §Gastrointestinal Surgical Unit, University of Cape Town, Kingsbury Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa ¶TianJin Mini-invasive Surgery Center, TianJin Medical University, TianJin NanKai Hospital, TianJin, China ‖Department of General, Visceral, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Annals of surgery (Impact Factor: 8.33). 03/2013; 257(5). DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31828604dd
Source: PubMed


OBJECTIVE:: To compare short- and long-term outcome after 180-degree laparoscopic anterior fundoplication (180-degree LAF) with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:: LNF is currently the most frequently performed surgical therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Alternatively, 180-degree LAF has been alleged to reduce troublesome dysphagia and gas-related symptoms, with similar reflux control. METHODS:: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and web of Knowledge CPCI-S were searched for randomized clinical trials comparing primary 180-degree LAF with LNF. The methodological quality was evaluated to assess bias risk. Primary outcomes were esophageal acid exposure, esophagitis, heartburn score, dilatation for dysphagia, modified Dakkak dysphagia score (0-45), and reoperation rate. Meta-analysis was conducted at 1 and 5 years. RESULTS:: Five distinct randomized clinical trials comparing 180-degree LAF (n = 227) with LNF (n = 231) were identified. At 1 year, the Dakkak dysphagia score [2.8 vs 4.8; weighted mean difference: -2.25; 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.66 to -1.83; P < 0.001], gas bloating [11% vs 18%; relative risk (RR) 0.59; 95% CI: 0.36-0.97; P = 0.04], flatulence (14% vs 25%; RR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.35-0.91; P = 0.02), inability to belch (19% vs 31%; RR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.40-0.99; P = 0.05), and inability to relieve bloating (34% vs 44%; RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.55-0.99; P = 0.04) were lower after 180-degree LAF. Esophageal acid exposure (standardized mean difference: 0.19; 95% CI: -0.07 to 0.46; P = 0.15), esophagitis (19% vs 13%; RR: 1.42; 95% CI: 0.69-2.91; P = 0.34), heartburn score (standardized mean difference: 1.27; 95% CI:-0.36 to 2.90; P = 0.13), dilatation rate (1.4% vs 2.8%; RR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.19-1.91; P = 0.39), reoperation rate (5.7% vs 2.8%; RR: 2.08; 95% CI: 0.80-5.41; P = 0.13), perioperative outcome, regurgitation, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use, lower esophageal sphincter pressure, and patient satisfaction were similar after 180-degree LAF and LNF. At 5 years, the Dakkak dysphagia score, flatulence, inability to belch, and inability to relieve bloating remained lower after 180-degree LAF. The 5-year heartburn score, dilatation rate, reoperation rate, PPI use, and patient satisfaction were similar. CONCLUSIONS:: At 1 and 5 years, dysphagia and gas-related symptoms are lower after 180-degree LAF than after LNF, and esophageal acid exposure and esophagitis are similar, with no differences in heartburn scores, patient satisfaction, dilatations, and reoperation rate. These results lend level 1a support for the use of 180-degree LAF for the surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

1 Follower
55 Reads

  • Der Chirurg 09/2013; 84(10). DOI:10.1007/s00104-013-2576-y · 0.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Over the last year, significant steps have been made toward understanding the pathogenesis of esophageal diseases and translating this knowledge to clinical practice. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is the most common outpatient diagnosis in gastroenterology and has a high prevalence in the general population. As many as 40% of patients with GERD have incomplete response to medical therapy, and the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying lack of response are now better understood. Novel medical and minimally invasive interventions are available to optimize management of GERD. Esophageal cancer, regardless of the histological subtype, has among the worst survival statistics among all malignancies. Taking advantage of technological advances in genome sequencing, the mutational spectra in esophageal cancer are now emerging, offering novel avenues for targeted therapies. Early diagnosis is another strand for improving survival. While genome-wide association studies are providing insights into genetic susceptibility, novel approaches to early detection of cancer are being devised through the use of biomarkers applied to esophageal samples and as part of imaging technologies. Dysmotility and eosinophilic esophagitis are the differential diagnoses in patients with dysphagia. New pathophysiological classifications have improved the management of motility disorders. Meanwhile, exciting progress has been made in the endoscopic management of these conditions. Eosinophilic esophagitis is still a relatively new entity, and the pathogenesis remains poorly understood. However, it is now clear that an allergic reaction to food plays an important role, and dietary interventions as well as biologic agents to block the inflammatory cascade are novel, promising fields of clinical research.
    F1000 Prime Reports 10/2013; 5:44. DOI:10.12703/P5-44
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose of review: Gastroesophageal reflux (GER) remains a common, challenging problem for clinicians, with differentiation of normal development from disease a particular issue. This review updates clinicians on advances in diagnosis of GER, relationship to other problems, and current practice in management. Recent findings: Development and understanding of multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring has given insights into the relationship of GER to symptoms. Medical treatment has changed little. Avoidance of overmedicalizing normal development is the major issue for clinicians. Laparoscopic fundoplication is established as equivalent to open fundoplication. Newer endoscopic techniques have only limited use in children to date. Summary: Major changes in pediatric GER relate to understanding of physiology and relationship of GER to symptoms. The major challenge for clinicians involve differentiation of normal from abnormal GER, and applying the most relevant management.
    Current Opinion in Pediatrics 10/2013; 25(5):597-603. DOI:10.1097/MOP.0b013e328363ecf5 · 2.53 Impact Factor
Show more