Literature DB >> 10998659

Laparoscopic repair of giant paraesophageal hernia: 100 consecutive cases.

J D Luketich1, S Raja, H C Fernando, W Campbell, N A Christie, P O Buenaventura, T L Weigel, R J Keenan, P R Schauer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the authors' laparoscopic experience for paraesophageal hernia (PEH). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Laparoscopic antireflux surgery and repair of small hiatal hernias are now routinely performed. Repair of a giant PEH is more complex and requires conventional surgery in most centers. Giant PEH accounts for approximately 5% of all hiatal hernias. Medical management may be associated with a 50% progression of symptoms and a significant death rate. Conventional open surgery has a low death rate, but complications are significant and return to routine activities is delayed in this frequently elderly population. Recently, short-term outcome studies have reported that minimally invasive approaches to PEH may be associated with a lower complication rate, a shorter hospital stay, and faster recovery.
METHODS: From July 1995 to February 2000, 100 patients (median age 68) underwent laparoscopic repair of a giant PEH. Follow-up included heartburn scores and quality of life measurements using the SF-12 physical component and mental component summary scores.
RESULTS: There were 8 type II hernias, 85 type III, and 7 type IV. Sac removal, crural repair, and antireflux procedures were performed (72 Nissen, 27 Collis-Nissen). The 30-day death rate was zero; there was one surgery-related death at 5 months from a perioperative stroke. Intraoperative complications included pneumothorax, esophageal perforation, and gastric perforation. There were three conversions to open surgery. Major postoperative complications included stroke, myocardial infarction, pulmonary emboli, adult respiratory distress syndrome, and repeat operations (two for abscess and one each for hematoma, repair leak, and recurrent hernia). Median length of stay was 2 days. Median follow-up at 12 months revealed resumption of proton pump inhibitors in 10 patients and one repeat operation for recurrence. The mean heartburn score was 2.3 (0, best; 45, worst); the satisfaction score was 91%; physical and mental component summary scores were 49 and 54, respectively (normal, 50).
CONCLUSION: This report represents the largest series to date of laparoscopic repair of giant PEH. In the authors' center with extensive experience in minimally invasive surgery, laparoscopic repair of giant PEH was successfully performed in 97% of patients, with a minimal complication rate, a 2-day length of stay, and good intermediate results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10998659      PMCID: PMC1421193          DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200010000-00016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  16 in total

1.  Massive hiatal hernias: the anatomic basis of repair.

Authors:  N K Altorki; D Yankelevitz; D B Skinner
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 5.209

2.  Paraesophageal hernia. A life-threatening disease.

Authors:  I A Ozdemir; W A Burke; P M Ikins
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  1973-12       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  Incarcerated paraesophageal hernia. A surgical emergency.

Authors:  L D Hill
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1973-08       Impact factor: 2.565

4.  Surgical management of esophageal reflux and hiatus hernia. Long-term results with 1,030 patients.

Authors:  D B Skinner; R H Belsey
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  1967-01       Impact factor: 5.209

5.  Esophageal motility and outcomes following laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair and fundoplication.

Authors:  L L Swanstrom; B A Jobe; L R Kinzie; K D Horvath
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 2.565

6.  Repair of paraesophageal hernias.

Authors:  S Horgan; T R Eubanks; G Jacobsen; P Omelanczuk; C A Pellegrini
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 2.565

7.  Laparoscopic repair of paraesophageal hiatal hernias.

Authors:  W A Gantert; M G Patti; M Arcerito; C Feo; L Stewart; M DePinto; S Bhoyrul; S Rangel; D Tyrrell; Y Fujino; S J Mulvihill; L W Way
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 6.113

8.  An approach to the management of para-oesophageal hiatus hernias.

Authors:  P J Treacy; G G Jamieson
Journal:  Aust N Z J Surg       Date:  1987-11

9.  Comparison of laparoscopic versus open repair of paraesophageal hernia.

Authors:  P R Schauer; S Ikramuddin; R H McLaughlin; T O Graham; A Slivka; K K Lee; W H Schraut; J D Luketich
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 2.565

10.  Paraesophageal hiatus hernia.

Authors:  F H Ellis; R E Crozier; J A Shea
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1986-04
View more
  63 in total

1.  The laparoscopic approach to paraesophageal hernia repair.

Authors:  Katie S Nason; James D Luketich; Bart P L Witteman; Ryan M Levy
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-12-09       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Results of a randomized trial of HERMES-assisted versus non-HERMES-assisted laparoscopic antireflux surgery.

Authors:  J D Luketich; H C Fernando; P O Buenaventura; N A Christie; S C Grondin; P R Schauer
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2002-06-14       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Evaluation of fibrin sealant for biologic mesh fixation at the hiatus in a porcine model.

Authors:  David M Krpata; Jeffrey A Blatnik; Karem C Harth; Melissa S Phillips; Yuri W Novitsky; Michael J Rosen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-04-27       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Quality of life after collis gastroplasty for short esophagus in patients with paraesophageal hernia.

Authors:  Katie S Nason; James D Luketich; Omar Awais; Ghulam Abbas; Arjun Pennathur; Rodney J Landreneau; Matthew J Schuchert
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2011-09-25       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 5.  [Typical intraoperative complications in laparoscopic surgery].

Authors:  F Köckerling; S Grund; D A Jacob
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  Hiatal mesh is associated with major resection at revisional operation.

Authors:  Michael Parker; Steven P Bowers; Jillian M Bray; Adam S Harris; Erol V Belli; Jason M Pfluke; Susanne Preissler; Horacio J Asbun; C Daniel Smith
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-05-13       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Combining laparoscopic giant paraesophageal hernia repair with sleeve gastrectomy in obese patients.

Authors:  Ankit D Patel; Edward Lin; Nathaniel W Lytle; Juan P Toro; Jahnavi Srinivasan; Arvinpal Singh; John F Sweeney; S Scott Davis
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-08-27       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Controversies in paraesophageal hernia repair: a review of literature.

Authors:  W A Draaisma; H G Gooszen; E Tournoij; I A M J Broeders
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-08-04       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Outcomes after a decade of laparoscopic giant paraesophageal hernia repair.

Authors:  James D Luketich; Katie S Nason; Neil A Christie; Arjun Pennathur; Blair A Jobe; Rodney J Landreneau; Matthew J Schuchert
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2009-12-11       Impact factor: 5.209

10.  Is a circular polypropylene mesh appropriate for application at the esophageal hiatus? Results from an experimental study in a porcine model.

Authors:  Beat P Müller-Stich; Arianeb Mehrabi; Hannes G Kenngott; Hamidreza Fonouni; Michael A Reiter; Gani Kuttymoratov; Felix Nickel; Georg R Linke; Ivo Wolf; Jörg Köninger; Carsten N Gutt
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-10-15       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.