Mini-laparotomy with Adjunctive Care versus Laparoscopy for Placement of Gastric Electrical Stimulation.

We compared outcomes for two gastric electrical stimulation placement strategies, minilaparotomy with adjunctive care (MLAC) versus laparoscopy without adjunctive care (LAPA). For electrode placement, the peritoneal cavity was accessed with either a single 2.5 to 3.0 cm midline incision (MLAC) or three trocar incisions (LAPA). For both groups, generator was placed subcutaneously over the anterior rectus sheath. For MLAC, adjunctive pain control measures were used for placement of both electrode and generator (transversus abdominus plane block). For LAPA, those that could not be completed by laparoscopy were converted to traditional open approach and kept in the analysis. MLAC (n = 128) resulted in shorter operative times than LAPA (n = 37) (median operative time: 87.5 vs 137.0 minutes, P ≤ 0.01). Hospital length of stay was also shorter for MLAC than for LAPA (median: 2.0 vs 3.0 days, P ≤ 0.01) without any increase in readmission rates to the hospital within 30 days of discharge (11.0 vs 16.2%, P = 0.39). After equalizing learning curves, these differences were even greater (median operative time: 84.5 vs 137.0 minutes, P < 0.01; median length of stay: 1.0 vs 3.0 days; P < 0.01) without increasing 30-day readmission rates (9.1 vs 16.2%, P = 0.25). For implantation of gastric electrical stimulators, minilaparotomy can result in improved outcomes when coupled with adjunctive pain control measures.

Laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia.

BACKGROUND: Achalasia is an uncommon illness affecting 1 per 100,000 patients yearly. There is evidence to suggest viral, autoimmune, and hereditary etiologies. There are many treatment options available including medications, botulinum toxin injection, pneumatic dilation, and surgical myotomy. METHODS: We present a retrospective review of patients undergoing laparoscopic-modified Heller myotomy at a large referral and surgical training center. RESULTS: There were 36 patients identified. Thirty patients had undergone prior treatment with botulinum toxin injection, pneumatic dilation, previous Heller myotomy, or esophageal stenting. Immediate complications included mucosal perforation (2), spleen injury (1), and trocar-site infection (1). There were no postoperative esophageal leaks. Three patients suffered reflux requiring the daily use of a proton pump inhibitor 9 months after surgery. Three patients suffered recurrent dysphagia. CONCLUSIONS: Presently, there are little data to suggest an ideal management strategy in patients with achalasia. Our patient population consists predominantly of failures of other treatment methods submitted for laparoscopic myotomy. Our data suggest that laparoscopic Heller myotomy can be safely undertaken in this population, without a higher than expected rate of recurrent symptoms or reflux.

Proximal sensor data from routine dual-sensor esophageal pH monitoring is often inaccurate.

Dual-sensor esophageal pH monitoring is routinely used to diagnose GERD. However, the proximal sensor may not be in proximal esophagus in patients with shortened esophagi. Our objective was to determine how often the proximal sensor was misplaced and to determine the effect on pH monitoring. Superior margins of the upper and lower esophageal sphincters (UES and LES) were determined prospectively in consecutive patients. Dual sensors were placed 20 and 5 cm above the LES with a fixed 15-cm spacing pH catheter. Patients were classified into subgroups based on the actual location of the proximal sensor. In 661 patients, the proximal pH sensor was in the hypopharynx in 9% of patients, within the UES in 36%, and in the proximal esophagus in 55%. Spearman's correlation for acid exposure was very good between the dual sensors when the proximal sensor was in the proximal esophagus (R = 0.76) but was poor when the proximal sensor was misplaced in the hypopharynx (R = 0.28). The proximal sensor was misplaced in 45% of patients undergoing dual-sensor esophageal pH monitoring. It is important to locate the UES by manometry before interpreting the proximal esophageal pH data.

Experience with seven cases of massive splenomegaly.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic excision of extremely large spleens has been variously reported, but the usual consensus in the literature is that any patient with a spleen anything over 3000 g is simply not a proper candidate for laparoscopy. This report details our experience with 7 patients (out of 95 operated on) with spleens ranging in size up to 4800 g. METHODS: Our operative procedure involved 3 or 4 trocars placed along a virtually semicircular line centered over the splenic hilum. Splenic attachments were excised with the ultrasonic dissector, and the hilum divided with a stapler. Due to the size of the spleens, Pfannenstiel's incisions were utilized for hand-port placement in the extraction of the specimen. RESULTS: Surgery was successful in all 7 cases, and required no conversion to an open procedure. The average splenic weight was 3450 g (range, 3000-4800 g). Mean operative time was 168 minutes (range, 127-250 minutes). CONCLUSION: Because of improved instrumentation (i.e., laparoscopic stapler and ultrasonic dissector) and refinement of technique, spleens very much larger than what was once considered practicable can now be excised laparoscopically with similarly low morbidity as compared with open splenectomy.

Techniques for repair of gastric prolapse after laparoscopic gastric banding.

Laparoscopic gastric banding is a valuable surgical option for treating morbidly obese patients. Its operative technique is continually being refined. Since its inception, many changes in technique have helped to reduce the complication rate. Currently, the major complications are obstruction, erosion, and band slippage. Band slippage requires surgical correction. Since each band costs approximately 3000 dollars, surgeons should attempt to preserve the band when facing patients with this complication. This paper discusses the techniques for the reduction of band slippage.

Jaundice due to extrabiliary gallstones.

OBJECTIVE: Cholecystectomy is one of the most common general surgical procedures performed today. The laparoscopic approach is beneficial to patients in terms of length of stay, postoperative pain, return to work, and cosmesis. Some drawbacks are associated with the minimal access form of cholecystectomy, including an increased incidence of common bile duct injuries. In addition, when the gallbladder is inadvertently perforated during laparoscopic cholecystectomy, retrieval of dropped gallstones may be difficult. We present a case in which gallstones spilled during cholecystectomy, causing near circumferential, extraluminal common hepatic duct compression, and clinical jaundice 1 year later. METHODS: The patient experienced jaundice and pruritus 12 months after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A computed tomographic scan was interpreted as cholelithiasis, but otherwise was normal (despite a previous cholecystectomy). Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was performed and a stent placed across a stenotic common hepatic duct. RESULTS: The results of brush biopsies were negative. The stent rapidly occluded and surgical intervention was undertaken. At exploratory laparotomy, an abscess cavity containing multiple gallstones was encountered. This abscess had encircled the common hepatic duct, causing compression and fibrosis. The stones were extracted and a hepaticojejunostomy was tailored. The patient's bilirubin level slowly decreased and she recovered without complication. CONCLUSIONS: Gallstones lost within the peritoneal cavity usually have no adverse sequela. Recently, however, numerous reports have surfaced describing untoward events. This case is certainly one to be included on the list. A surgeon should make every attempt to retrieve spilled gallstones due to the potential later complications described herein.

Hypopharyngeal pH monitoring artifact in detection of laryngopharyngeal reflux.

Hypopharyngeal pH artifacts have been a concern in the detection of laryngopharyngeal reflux. Our purpose was to analyze and quantify artifacts from dual-sensor hypopharyngeal pH monitoring. In all, 42 hypopharyngeal and 58 esophageal pH studies were reviewed. Type 1 (out of range), type 2 (pH drift), and type 3 (isolated pH drop) artifacts were identified. The proportion of proximal-sensor pH drop to <4 that was artifactual was determined. The median number (range) of artifacts was 1 (0-17) and 2 (0-28) for hypopharyngeal and esophageal pH studies, respectively (P = NS). The median proportion of artifactual pH drop to <4 was 1% (0-84%) and 2% (0-74%) for hypopharyngeal and esophageal pH studies, respectively (P = NS). The diagnosis did not change in any patient after excluding pH artifacts. In all, 19% of the combined 2,432 hypopharyngeal pH drops of <4 were artifacts. In conclusion, hypopharyngeal pH artifacts per study were uncommon but can be prominent in a few patients. One can identify these artifacts and exclude them from analysis.