Technique and outcome of day case laparoscopic hiatus hernia surgery for small and large hernias: a five-year retrospective review from a high-volume UK centre

Le résumé fourni par la source

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery is the standard surgical treatment for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in patients for who long-term pharmacotherapy is intolerable or ineffective. Advances in anaesthesia and minimally invasive surgery have led to day case treatment being adopted by some centres. The objective of this study is to describe our day case pathway and peri- and postoperative outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a single centre, retrospective case series review of a prospectively collected database from October 2014 to August 2019 performed in a tertiary centre for upper gastrointestinal surgery. Data collected included demographics, comorbidities, indications, complications, length of stay and readmission. RESULTS: A total of 362 patients underwent laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery with or without hiatus hernia repair of up to 10cm, with day case rates of 59%. Unplanned admission following day surgery was 5.1% (13/225) and 30-day readmission was 2.2% (8/362); 90.6% of patients remained in hospital for less than 24 hours. There was one intraoperative complication and one patient required revisional surgery within 30 days. The rate of all postoperative complications was 1.38% (5/362) with one postoperative mortality. DISCUSSION: The inclusion of larger hernias is unusual, as most studies limit size to 5cm or less. Our results show the safety and feasibility of the procedure even when applied to hiatus hernias up to 10cm. Success was multifactorial and based on standardisation of procedures and support from dedicated specialist nursing staff. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery can be performed safely as a day case procedure even in larger hiatus hernias, with a dedicated care pathway and specialist nurse practitioners to support it.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.