Outcomes of Laparoscopic Redo Fundoplication in Patients With Failed Antireflux Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize the current available evidence regarding the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic redo fundoplication (LRF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although antireflux surgery is highly effective, a minority of patients will require a LRF due to recurrent symptoms, mechanical failure, or intolerable side-effects of the primary repair.

METHODS

A systematic electronic search on LRF was conducted in the Medline database and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Conversion and postoperative morbidity were used as primary endpoints to determine feasibility and safety. Symptom improvement, QoL improvement, and recurrence rates were used as secondary endpoints to assess efficacy. Heterogeneity across studies was tested with the Chi-square and the proportion of total variation attributable to heterogeneity was estimated by the inconsistency (I2) statistic. A random-effect model was used to generate a pooled proportion with 95% confidence interval (CI) across all studies.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies and 2,095 LRF were included. The mean age at reoperation was 53.3 years. The weighted pooled proportion of conversion was 6.02% (95% CI, 4.16%-8.91%) and the meta-analytic prevalence of major morbidity was 4.98% (95% CI, 3.31%-6.95%). The mean follow-up period was 25 (6-58) months. The weighted pooled proportion of symptom and QoL improvement was 78.50% (95% CI, 74.71%-82.03%) and 80.65% (95% CI, 75.80%-85.08%), respectively. The meta-analytic prevalence estimate of recurrence across the studies was 10.71% (95% CI, 7.74%-14.10%).

CONCLUSIONS

LRF is a feasible and safe procedure that provides symptom relief and improved QoL to the vast majority of patients. Although heterogeneously assessed, recurrence rates seem to be low. LRF should be considered a valuable treatment modality for patients with failed antireflux surgery.