| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Analatos, Apostolos, et al.
(author)
-
Evaluation of resection of the gastroesophageal junction and jejunal interposition (Merendino procedure) as a rescue procedure in patients with a failed redo antireflux procedure. A single-center experience
- 2018
-
In: BMC Surgery. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1471-2482. ; 18
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Primary antireflux surgery has high success rates but 5 to 20% of patients undergoing antireflux operations can experience recurrent reflux and dysphagia, requiring reoperation. Different surgical approaches after failed fundoplication have been described in the literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate resection of the gastroesophageal junction with jejunal interposition (Merendino procedure) as a rescue procedure after failed fundoplication.Methods: All patients who underwent a Merendino procedure at the Karolinska University Hospital between 2004 and 2012 after a failed antireflux fundoplication were identified. Data regarding previous surgical history, preoperative workup, postoperative complications, subsequent investigations and re-interventions were collected retrospectively. The follow-up also included questionnaires regarding quality of life, gastrointestinal function and the dumping syndrome.Results: Twelve patients had a Merendino reconstruction. Ten patients had undergone at least two previous fundoplications, of which one patient had four such procedures. The main indication for surgery was epigastric and radiating back pain, with or without dysphagia. Postoperative complications occurred in 8/12 patients (67%). During a median follow-up of 35 months (range 20-61), four (25%) patients had an additional redo procedure with conversion to a Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy within 12 months, mainly due to obstructive symptoms that could not be managed conservatively or with endoscopic techniques. Questionnaires scores were generally poor in all dimensions.Conclusions: In our experience, the Merendino procedure seems to be an unsuitable surgical option for patients who require an alternative surgical reconstruction due to a failed fundoplication. However, the small number of patients included in this study as well as the small number of participants who completed the postoperative workout limits this study.
|
|
| 6. |
- Analatos, Apostolos, et al.
(author)
-
Tension-free mesh versus suture-alone cruroplasty in antireflux surgery : a randomized, double-blind clinical trial
- 2020
-
In: British Journal of Surgery. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0007-1323 .- 1365-2168. ; 107:13, s. 1731-1740
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BackgroundAntireflux surgery is effective for the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) but recurrence of hiatal hernia remains a challenge. In other types of hernia repair, use of mesh is associated with reduced recurrence rates. The aim of this study was to compare the use of mesh versus sutures alone for the repair of hiatal hernia in laparoscopic antireflux surgery.MethodsPatients undergoing laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for GORD between January 2006 and December 2010 were allocated randomly to closure of the diaphragmatic hiatus with crural sutures or non-absorbable polytetrafluoroethylene mesh (CruraSoft®). The primary outcome was recurrence of hiatal hernia, as determined by barium swallow study 12 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes were: intraoperative and postoperative complications, use of antireflux medication, postoperative oesophageal acid exposure, quality of life, dysphagia and duration of hospital stay.ResultsSome 77 patients were randomized to the suture technique and 82 patients underwent mesh repair. At 1 year, the hiatal hernia had recurred in six of 64 patients (9 per cent) in the mesh group and two of 64 (3 per cent) in the suture group (P = 0·144). Reflux symptoms, use of proton pump inhibitors and oesophageal acid exposure did not differ between the groups. At 3 years, recurrence rates were 13 and 10 per cent in the mesh and suture groups respectively (P = 0·692). Dysphagia scores decreased in both groups, but more patients had dysphagia for solid food after mesh closure (P = 0·013). Quality-of-life scores were comparable between the groups.ConclusionTension-free crural repair with non-absorbable mesh does not reduce the incidence of recurrent hiatal hernia compared with use of sutures alone in patients undergoing laparoscopic fundoplication. NCT03730233 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
|
|
| 7. |
- Insulander, J., et al.
(author)
-
Prognosis following surgical bypass compared with laparotomy alone in unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma
- 2016
-
In: British Journal of Surgery. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0007-1323 .- 1365-2168. ; 103:9, s. 1200-1208
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Resection with curative intent has been shown to prolong survival of patients with locoregional pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, up to 33 per cent of patients are deemed unresectable at exploratory laparotomy owing to unanticipated locally advanced or metastatic disease. In these patients, prophylactic double bypass (PDB) procedures have been considered the standard of care. The aim of this study was to compare PDB with exploratory laparotomy alone in terms of impact on postoperative course, chemotherapy and overall survival.Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study (2004-2013) was conducted using a prospective institutional database. Patients with histologically confirmed, unresectable PDAC were included. Relationships between PDB procedures, exploratory laparotomy alone, postoperative chemotherapy and best supportive care were investigated by means of Cox regression. Overall survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier estimations and log rank test.Results: Of 503 patients with PDAC scheduled for resection with curative intent, 104 were deemed unresectable at laparotomy (resection rate 79·3 per cent). Seventy-four patients underwent PDB procedures and 30 had exploratory laparotomy alone. PDB and exploratory laparotomy were similar in terms of perioperative mortality, initiation of chemotherapy and overall survival. Compared with best supportive care, postoperative chemotherapy prolonged survival (8·0 versus 14·4 months in locally advanced PDAC, P = 0·007; 2·3 versus 8·0 months in metastatic PDAC, P < 0·001). Patients undergoing chemotherapy following exploratory laparotomy alone had longer median overall survival than patients undergoing chemotherapy following PDB procedures (16·3 versus 10·3 months; P = 0·040).Conclusion: Patients with pancreatic cancer deemed unresectable at laparotomy may derive survival benefit from subsequent chemotherapy as opposed to supportive care alone. At laparotomy, proceeding with a bypass procedure for prophylactic symptom control may be prognostically unfavourable.
|
|
