Surgical endoscopy · 2022
Evaluation of post-operative dysphagia following anti-reflux surgery.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Greenberg Jacques A, Stefanova Dessislava I, Reyes Fernando Valle, Edelmuth Rodrigo C L, Harik Lamia, Thiesmeyer Jessica W, Egan Caitlin E, Palacardo Federico, Liu Mengyuan, Christos Paul, Schnoll-Sussman Felice H, Katz Philip O, Finnerty Brendan M, Fahey Thomas J, Zarnegar Rasa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Anti-reflux surgery (ARS) has known long-term complications, including dysphagia, bloat, and flatulence, among others. The factors affecting the development of post-operative dysphagia are poorly understood. We investigated the correlation of intra-operative esophagogastric junction (EGJ) characteristics and procedure type with post-operative dysphagia following ARS.
METHODS: Robotic ARS was performed on 197 consecutive patients with pathologic reflux utilizing EndoFLIP™ technology. Intraoperative EGJ measurements including distensibility index (DI), cross-sectional area (CSA), and high-pressure zone (HPZ) length were collected. Dysphagia was assessed pre-operatively and at 3 months post-operatively.
RESULTS: The median pre-operative DI for all procedures was 2.6 (IQR 1.6-4.5) mm2/mmHg. There was no difference in post-operative DI between procedures [Hill: 0.9 (IQR 0.7-1.1) mm2/mmHg, Nissen: 1.0 (IQR 0.7-1.4) mm2/mmHg, Toupet: 1.2 (IQR 0.8-1.5) mm2/mmHg, Linx: 1.0 (IQR 0.7-1.2) mm2/mmHg, p = 0.24], whereas post-operative HPZ length differed by augmentation type [Hill: 3 (IQR 2.8-3) cm, Nissen: 3.5 (IQR 3-3.5) cm, Toupet: 3 (IQR 2.5-3.5) cm, Linx: 2.5 (IQR 2.5-3) cm, p = 0.032]. Eighty-nine patients (45.2%) had pre-operative dysphagia. Thirty-two patients (27.6%) reported any dysphagia at their 3-month post-operative visit and 12 (10.3%) developed new or worsening post-operative dysphagia [Hill: 2/18 (11.1%), Nissen: 2/35 (5.7%), Toupet: 4/54 (7.4%), Linx: 4/9 (44.4%), p = 0.006]. The median pre-operative and post-operative DI of patients who developed new or worsening dysphagia was 2.0 (IQR 0.9-3.8) mm2/mmHg and 1.2 (IQR 1.0-1.8) mm2/mmHg, respectively, and that of those who did not was 2.5 (IQR 1.6-4.0) mm2/mmHg and 1.0 (IQR 0.7-1.4) mm2/mmHg (p = 0.21 and 0.16, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Post-operative DI was similar between procedures, and there was no correlation with new or worsening post-operative dysphagia. Linx placement was associated with higher rates of new or worsening post-operative dysphagia despite a shorter post-procedure HPZ length and similar post-operative DI when compared to other methods of LES augmentation.
METHODS: Robotic ARS was performed on 197 consecutive patients with pathologic reflux utilizing EndoFLIP™ technology. Intraoperative EGJ measurements including distensibility index (DI), cross-sectional area (CSA), and high-pressure zone (HPZ) length were collected. Dysphagia was assessed pre-operatively and at 3 months post-operatively.
RESULTS: The median pre-operative DI for all procedures was 2.6 (IQR 1.6-4.5) mm2/mmHg. There was no difference in post-operative DI between procedures [Hill: 0.9 (IQR 0.7-1.1) mm2/mmHg, Nissen: 1.0 (IQR 0.7-1.4) mm2/mmHg, Toupet: 1.2 (IQR 0.8-1.5) mm2/mmHg, Linx: 1.0 (IQR 0.7-1.2) mm2/mmHg, p = 0.24], whereas post-operative HPZ length differed by augmentation type [Hill: 3 (IQR 2.8-3) cm, Nissen: 3.5 (IQR 3-3.5) cm, Toupet: 3 (IQR 2.5-3.5) cm, Linx: 2.5 (IQR 2.5-3) cm, p = 0.032]. Eighty-nine patients (45.2%) had pre-operative dysphagia. Thirty-two patients (27.6%) reported any dysphagia at their 3-month post-operative visit and 12 (10.3%) developed new or worsening post-operative dysphagia [Hill: 2/18 (11.1%), Nissen: 2/35 (5.7%), Toupet: 4/54 (7.4%), Linx: 4/9 (44.4%), p = 0.006]. The median pre-operative and post-operative DI of patients who developed new or worsening dysphagia was 2.0 (IQR 0.9-3.8) mm2/mmHg and 1.2 (IQR 1.0-1.8) mm2/mmHg, respectively, and that of those who did not was 2.5 (IQR 1.6-4.0) mm2/mmHg and 1.0 (IQR 0.7-1.4) mm2/mmHg (p = 0.21 and 0.16, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Post-operative DI was similar between procedures, and there was no correlation with new or worsening post-operative dysphagia. Linx placement was associated with higher rates of new or worsening post-operative dysphagia despite a shorter post-procedure HPZ length and similar post-operative DI when compared to other methods of LES augmentation.