Laparoscopic reoperation following failed antireflux surgery

D. I. Watson, G. G. Jamieson, P. A. Game, R. S. Williams, P. G. Devitt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

80 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background:

The aim was to determine the feasibility of laparoscopic revision surgery following previous open and laparoscopic antireflux operations.
Methods:

The outcome was determined for 27 patients (14 men, 13 women) who had undergone attempted laparoscopic revision between 3 months and 25 years after a previous antireflux operation. Median follow‐up was 12 (range 3–48) months.
Results:

Thirteen patients had previously had an open antireflux procedure (Nissen fundoplication, seven; transthoracic anatomical repair, five; Belsey procedure, one) and 14 a laparoscopic procedure (Nissen, 12; anterior partial fundoplication, two). The indications for revision were: recurrent reflux, 15; paraoesophageal hiatus hernia, six; troublesome dysphagia, six. Fifteen procedures comprised construction of a new Nissen fundoplication, six conversion from a Nissen to a partial wrap, three repair of a paraoesophageal hernia and three widening of the oesophageal hiatus. Revision was successfully completed laparoscopically in 12 patients following a previous laparoscopic procedure and in nine following a previous open operation. Median operating time was 105 min after previous open surgery and 80 min after laparoscopic surgery. No perioperative complications occurred in either group and a good outcome was achieved in 25 of the 27 patients.
Conclusion:

Laparoscopic reoperative antireflux surgery is feasible. Reoperation is likely to be more difficult following failure of an open procedure than a laparoscopic one.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)98-101
Number of pages4
JournalBritish Journal of Surgery
Volume86
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Laparoscopic reoperation following failed antireflux surgery'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this