BACKGROUND: About a decade ago, partial (240 degrees) fundoplication became popular for treating gastroesophageal reflux disease in cases where the patient's primary esophageal peristalsis was weak. A total (360 degrees) fundoplication was reserved for patients with normal peristalsis (tailored approach). The theory was that partial fundoplication was an adequate antireflux measure, and by posing less resistance for the weak esophageal peristalsis to overcome, it would give rise to less dysphagia. Short-term results seemed to confirm these ideas. STUDY DESIGN: This study reports the longterm followup of patients in whom a tailored approach (type of wrap chosen to match esophageal peristalsis) was used, and the results of a nonselective approach, using a total fundoplication regardless of the amplitude of esophageal peristalsis. We analyzed clinical and laboratory findings in 357 patients who had an operation for gastroesophageal reflux disease between October 1992 and November 2002. Group 1 was composed of 235 patients in whom a tailored approach was used between October 1992 and December 1999 (141 patients, partial fundoplication and 94 patients, total fundoplication). Group 2 contained 122 patients in whom a nonselective approach was used (total fundoplication regardless of quality of peristalsis). RESULTS: In group 1, heartburn from reflux (ie, pH monitoring test was abnormal) recurred in 19% of patients after partial fundoplication and in 4% after total fundoplication. In group 2, heartburn recurred in 4% of patients after total fundoplication. The incidence of postoperative dysphagia was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data show that laparoscopic partial fundoplication was less effective than total fundoplication in curing gastroesophageal reflux disease, and compared with a partial (240 degrees) fundoplication, a total (360 degrees) fundoplication was not followed by more dysphagia, even when esophageal peristalsis was weak.
BACKGROUND: About a decade ago, partial (240 degrees) fundoplication became popular for treating gastroesophageal reflux disease in cases where the patient's primary esophageal peristalsis was weak. A total (360 degrees) fundoplication was reserved for patients with normal peristalsis (tailored approach). The theory was that partial fundoplication was an adequate antireflux measure, and by posing less resistance for the weak esophageal peristalsis to overcome, it would give rise to less dysphagia. Short-term results seemed to confirm these ideas. STUDY DESIGN: This study reports the longterm followup of patients in whom a tailored approach (type of wrap chosen to match esophageal peristalsis) was used, and the results of a nonselective approach, using a total fundoplication regardless of the amplitude of esophageal peristalsis. We analyzed clinical and laboratory findings in 357 patients who had an operation for gastroesophageal reflux disease between October 1992 and November 2002. Group 1 was composed of 235 patients in whom a tailored approach was used between October 1992 and December 1999 (141 patients, partial fundoplication and 94 patients, total fundoplication). Group 2 contained 122 patients in whom a nonselective approach was used (total fundoplication regardless of quality of peristalsis). RESULTS: In group 1, heartburn from reflux (ie, pH monitoring test was abnormal) recurred in 19% of patients after partial fundoplication and in 4% after total fundoplication. In group 2, heartburn recurred in 4% of patients after total fundoplication. The incidence of postoperative dysphagia was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data show that laparoscopic partial fundoplication was less effective than total fundoplication in curing gastroesophageal reflux disease, and compared with a partial (240 degrees) fundoplication, a total (360 degrees) fundoplication was not followed by more dysphagia, even when esophageal peristalsis was weak.
Authors: Dimitrios Stefanidis; William W Hope; Geoffrey P Kohn; Patrick R Reardon; William S Richardson; Robert D Fanelli Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-08-20 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: F Pizza; G Rossetti; P Limongelli; G Del Genio; V Maffettone; V Napolitano; L Brusciano; G Russo; S Tolone; M Di Martino; A Del Genio Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2007-02-07 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: M Fein; M Bueter; A Thalheimer; V Pachmayr; J Heimbucher; S M Freys; K-H Fuchs Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2008-09-03 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Brian Bello; Marco Zoccali; Roberto Gullo; Marco E Allaix; Fernando A Herbella; Arunas Gasparaitis; Marco G Patti Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2012-10-23 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Marco E Allaix; P Marco Fisichella; Imre Noth; Bernardino M Mendez; Marco G Patti Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2013-04-25 Impact factor: 3.452