The outcome of fundoplication in patients with GERD based on abnormal impedance testing.

INTRODUCTION: The role of impedance testing in selecting patients for antireflux surgery is poorly understood. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients that underwent antireflux surgery for GERD based on an abnormal pH/abnormal impedance test versus a normal pH/abnormal impedance test. METHODS: Records of patients who had an abnormal off-medication impedance test (≥ 48 total reflux events) who underwent antireflux surgery were reviewed and divided into two groups: normal [pH-] or abnormal [pH+] esophageal acid exposure (DeMeester score > 14.7). Symptom resolution was compared: scale 1 (no resolution) to 5 (complete resolution). RESULTS: Eighty-two patients met criteria: 44 [pH+] and 38 [pH-]. There were no differences in the demographics or indications for surgery. The frequencies of heartburn and regurgitation symptoms were significantly reduced by fundoplication in both groups. Complete resolution of heartburn was more common in the [pH+] group (90%) compared to the [pH-] group (67%) [p = 0.02]. Resolution of regurgitation was similar in both groups (90% in the [pH+] group vs 79% in the [pH-] group, p = 0.20). The mean dysphagia frequency score decreased for the [pH+] group, but increased in the [pH-] group. New-onset dysphagia was more common in [pH-] patients (23%) compared to [pH+] patients (5%), (p = 0.02). Continued use of PPI medications was significantly more likely in [pH-] group (42%) compared to the [pH+] group (21%). There was no difference in surgical satisfaction rates between groups. DISCUSSION: Patients with abnormal impedance and increased esophageal acid exposure had significantly better symptom resolution, less dysphagia, and less frequent PPI use with antireflux surgery versus those with normal pH. These findings urge caution in the use of abnormal impedance values with normal esophageal acid exposure for the selection of patients for an antireflux operation.

Wait only to resuscitate: early surgery for acutely presenting paraesophageal hernias yields better outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Incarceration and obstruction of an intrathoracic stomach are potentially devastating complications of paraesophageal hernias (PEH). Gastric decompression and resuscitation are important elements of preoperative management of acutely presenting PEH. The optimal time for surgical repair after decompression is unknown. We hypothesized that in obstructed PEH, early surgery may improve outcomes. METHODS: From the 2005-2010 National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database, we selected PEH repairs with a diagnosis of obstruction. Patients were divided by time to surgery: ≤1 day of admission (early) or >1 day (interval). Outcomes were mortality and morbidity. Multivariable regression controlled for age and cardiopulmonary comorbidities. RESULTS: Of 224 patients, 149 (67%) were early and 75 (33%) were interval, with mean 3.6 days. Repairs were 89% transabdominal, 9% included fundoplication, and 18% gastrostomy. Early and interval groups experienced similar morbidity 23 versus 31% (p = 0.2) and mortality 5.4 versus 4% (p = 0.7). Pulmonary, wound, or VTE complications were equivalent. Sepsis was less (2.7 vs. 13%, p = 0.002) and length of stay was shorter (5 vs. 11 days, p < 0.001) for early vs. interval patients. On adjusted analysis, the early group had an 80% reduction in sepsis (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.05-0.6, p = 0.005). Odds of overall or other morbidity or mortality were statistically similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who required emergency surgery for PEH have disease complicated by strangulation, perforation, bleeding, or sepsis. Emergency surgery for PEH repair is inherently high-risk and preoperative resuscitation and decompression is critical. In our analysis, patients with an obstructed PEH had less postoperative sepsis and fewer days in the hospital if surgery was performed within the first hospital day. However, there was no difference in mortality between early and delayed treatment. Deferring surgery for resuscitation permits optimization, but prolonged delay may worsen patient outcomes.