Puri Varun, Jacobsen Kyle, Bell Jennifer M, Crabtree Traves D, Kreisel Daniel, Krupnick Alexander S, Patterson G Alexander, Meyers Bryan F
From the Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St Louis, MO USA.
Innovations (Phila). 2013 Sep-Oct;8(5):341-7. doi: 10.1097/IMI.0000000000000012.
The need for esophageal lengthening (EL) as part of hiatal hernia (HH) repair is perceived to elevate perioperative risk and provide functionally inferior outcomes. Our objectives were to determine the risk factors of undergoing EL and to compare outcomes between operations with and without EL. We hypothesized that operative and functional outcomes for HH repair were similar in patients whether they required EL or not.
We reviewed institutional experience with EL as part of HH repair. The patients underwent symptom evaluation before and after surgery using a validated tool.
Between 1999 and 2009, a total of 375 patients underwent HH repair. The operative approach was thoracotomy, 153 (41%); laparotomy, 18 (5%); laparoscopy, 167 (44%); or combined, 37 (10%). Of these, 168 (45%) required EL. There was a higher need for thoracotomy in the patients undergoing EL (79/168 vs 74/207, χ = 4.88, P = 0.034). The incidence of perioperative complications (leak, pneumonia, ileus, respiratory failure, and bleeding) was similar between the groups. Sixty-five selected patients undergoing EL were compared with 63 patients with comparable demographics not requiring EL. In a well-validated questionnaire that assessed symptoms before and after surgery, the patients undergoing EL showed significant improvement in their heartburn (76.8%), dysphagia (67.6%), regurgitation (71.7%), chest pain (91.9%), and nausea (86.5%) (P < 0.05). The patients not undergoing EL also showed significant improvement in their heartburn (81.1%), dysphagia (71.1%), regurgitation (64.4%), chest pain (64.1%), and nausea (61.0%) (P < 0.05). Improvement in symptoms, the continued use of antacid medications, and overall surgery satisfaction score were statistically similar between the two groups.
Operative and functional outcomes for HH repair with or without EL are acceptable and comparable. Thoracic surgeons should use EL without reservations for appropriate indications.
作为食管裂孔疝(HH)修复术一部分的食管延长术(EL)被认为会增加围手术期风险并导致功能较差的结果。我们的目标是确定接受EL的风险因素,并比较有EL和无EL手术的结果。我们假设,无论是否需要EL,HH修复术的手术和功能结果在患者中是相似的。
我们回顾了作为HH修复术一部分的EL的机构经验。患者在手术前后使用经过验证的工具进行症状评估。
1999年至2009年期间,共有375例患者接受了HH修复术。手术方式为开胸手术153例(41%);剖腹手术18例(5%);腹腔镜手术167例(44%);或联合手术37例(10%)。其中,168例(45%)需要EL。接受EL的患者中开胸手术的需求更高(79/168对74/207,χ = 4.88,P = 0.034)。两组围手术期并发症(渗漏、肺炎、肠梗阻、呼吸衰竭和出血)的发生率相似。将65例接受EL的选定患者与63例人口统计学特征相似但不需要EL的患者进行比较。在一份经过充分验证的评估手术前后症状的问卷中,接受EL的患者在烧心(76.8%)、吞咽困难(67.6%)、反流(71.7%)、胸痛(91.9%)和恶心(86.5%)方面有显著改善(P < 0.05)。未接受EL的患者在烧心(81.1%)、吞咽困难(71.1%)、反流(64.4%)、胸痛(64.1%)和恶心(61.0%)方面也有显著改善(P < 0.05)。两组在症状改善、抗酸药物的持续使用以及总体手术满意度评分方面在统计学上相似。
有或无EL的HH修复术的手术和功能结果是可接受的且具有可比性。胸外科医生应毫不犹豫地对适当的适应症使用EL。