oru.sePublikationer
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Open vs laparoscopic partial posterior fundoplication: A prospective randomized trial
Center for Gastrointestinal Disease, Ersta Hospital, Stockholm; Karolinska Institutet, Department for Clinical Science Intervention and Technology, Division of Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm.
Queen Sophia Hospital, Stockholm.
Center for Gastrointestinal Disease, Ersta Hospital, Stockholm; Karolinska Institutet, Department for Clinical Science Intervention and Technology, Division of Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm.
Center for Gastrointestinal Disease, Ersta Hospital, Stockholm; Karolinska Institutet, Department for Clinical Science Intervention and Technology, Division of Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2636-4745
2007 (English)In: Surgical Endoscopy, ISSN 0930-2794, E-ISSN 1432-2218, Vol. 21, no 2, 289-98 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: This study compares outcomes following open and laparoscopic partial posterior fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease concerning perioperative course, postoperative complications, symptomatic relief, recurrent disease, and the need for reinterventional surgery.

Methods: A prospective randomized trial was performed. Pre- and postoperative testing included endoscopy, esophageal function testing, patient questionnaire, and clinical assessment. Patients were followed for three years.

Materials: Ninety-three patients were randomized to open and 99 to laparoscopic surgery.

Results: Complication rates were higher, and length of stay (LOS) [5 (3-36) vs 3 (1-12) days] and time off work [42 (12-76) vs 28 (0-108) days] was longer in the open group (p < 0.01). Early side effects and recurrences were more common (p < 0.05) in the laparoscopic group. One patient in the open group and 8 patients in the laparoscopic group required surgery for recurrent disease and 7 patients required surgery for incisional hernias after open surgery. Overall, at one and three years, there were no differences in patient-assessed satisfactory outcome (93.5/93.5 vs 88.8/90.8%) or reflux control (p = 0.53) between the open and laparoscopic groups.

Conclusions: The finding of fewer general complications, shorter length of stay and recovery, similar need for reoperations, and comparable 3-year outcomes, makes the laparoscopic approach the primary choice when considering surgical options for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
New York, USA: Springer Science+Business Media B.V., 2007. Vol. 21, no 2, 289-98 p.
Keyword [en]
GERD, laparoscopic surgery, fundoplication, randomized prospective trial
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-40518DOI: 10.1007/s00464-006-0013-8ISI: 000243882400027PubMedID: 17122976Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-33846269674OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-40518DiVA: diva2:777417
Available from: 2015-01-08 Created: 2015-01-08 Last updated: 2016-05-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ljungqvist, Olle
In the same journal
Surgical Endoscopy
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 220 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf