Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Long-term experience of treating 185 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) by anti-reflux surgery respecting the functional–morphological restoration of the esophagus

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

According to anatomical investigations the whole esophagus plays a crucial role as reflux barrier in the pathogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Morphologically, the spirally arranged muscle fibres present a tension-dependent “stretch closure” and in the event of any reduction of tension, as for example caused by an axial hiatus hernia, the organ may become inefficient. The aim of this study was to evaluate quality of life as the main success criterion after anti-reflux surgery based strictly on the restoration of functional morphology.

Methods

Between January 1999 and December 2000, 185 patients with GERD were treated by surgery in accordance with functional–morphological principles. After dissecting the mediastinum, the gastroesophageal junction was displaced into the abdomen with consecutive retensioning the esophagus. The esophageal hiatus was reconstructed with non-absorbable single knot sutures and strengthened with alloplastic material. The application of a 180° fundus cuff around the posterior esophageal circumference served as a “spacer” and also restored the angle of His. Preoperatively, all patients underwent endoscopy, pH metry and manometry. During postoperative follow-up, recurrence rate and quality of life were evaluated via a disease-specific scale.

Results

Preoperatively, 85% of the patients had an elevated DeMeester Score with a median of 81.4; 64% had reflux esophagitis and 37% had reduced lower esophageal sphincter pressure. All 185 operations were performed without conversion in a median operating time of 74 min. In one patient a lesion of the esophagus was treated during the operation; two patients had lesions of the splenic capsule which were also dealt with during the operation. Postoperatively, pleural effusions occurred in 15 patients and puncture was deemed necessary in one subject. Ninety-three percent were followed up for a median of 45 months and the recurrence rate was 2.3%. The quality of life index was 81.6±12.4 points preoperatively, and had significantly improved to 125.2±12.7 points in the follow-up.

Conclusion

Through the functional–morphological concept of anti-reflux surgery comprising the restoration of the tension-dependent “stretch closure” of the esophagus, significant long-term improvement in quality of life with a low recurrence rate and perioperative morbidity can be achieved.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rodrigo J, Hernandez CJ, Vidal MA, Pedrosa JA (1975) Vegetative innervation of the esophagus. III. Intraepithelial endings. Acta Anat (Basel) 92:243–258

    Google Scholar 

  2. Siddiqui MA, Johnston BT, Leite LP, Katzka DA, Castell DO (1996) Sensitization of esophageal mucosa by prior acid infusion: effect of decreasing intervals between infusions. Am J Gastroenterol 91:1745–1748

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Weusten BL, Akkermans LM, vanBerge-Henegouwen GP, Smout AJ (1995) Symptom perception in reflux disease is dependent on spatiotemporal reflux characteristics. Gastroenterology 108:1739–1744

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Clouse RE, Richter JE, Heading RC, Janssens J, Wilson JA (1999) Functional esophageal disorders. Gut 45(Suppl II):31–36

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fass R, Mackel C, Sampliner RE (1994) 24-hour pH monitoring in symptomatic patients without erosive esophagitis who did not respond to antireflux treatment. J Clin Gastroenterol 19:97–99

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Price SF, Smithson KW, Castell DO (1978) Food sensitivity in reflux esophagitis. Gastroenterology 75:240–243

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Rodriguez-Stanley S, Robinson M, Earnest DL, Greenwood-van Meerveld B, Miner PB (1999) Esophageal hypersensitivity may be a major cause of heartburn. Am J Gastroenterol 94:628–631

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Blom D, Peters JH, DeMeester TR, Crookes PF, Hagan JA, DeMeester SR, Bremner C (2002) Physiologic mechanism and preoperative prediction of new-onset dysphagia after laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. J Gastrointest Surg 6:22–28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Holloway RH (2000) The anti-reflux barrier and mechanisms of gastro-oesophageal reflux. Baillière's Clin Gastroenterol 14:681–699

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Xenos ES (2002) The role of esophageal motility and hiatal hernia in esophageal exposure to acid. Surg Endosc 16:914–920

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Stelzner F, Lierse W (1968) Der angiomuskuläre Dehnverschluß der Speiseröhre. The angiomuscular dilation closing of the terminal esophagus. Langenbeck's Arch Chir 321:35–64

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Stelzner F, Lierse W (1978) Weitere Untersuchungen zum angiomuskulären Dehnverschluß der terminalen Speiseröhre. Further investigations of insufficient stretching–closing mechanism of the terminal esophagus (author's translation). Langenbeck's Arch Chir 346:177–185

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kaye MD (1977) Postprandial gastrooesophageal reflux in healthy people. Gut 18:709–712

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mittal RK, Holloway RH, Penagini R, Blackshaw LA, Dent J (1995) Transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation. Gastroenterology 109:601–610

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Eypasch E, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JI, Ure B, Neugebauer E, Troidl H (1993) The gastrointestinal quality of life index. A clinical index for measuring patient status in gastroenterologic surgery. Chirurg 64:264–274

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Stelzner F, Roedel R, Biersack HJ, Jäger OE, v Mallek D (2004) Nachweis der natürlichen Spontanaktivität der kranio-ösophagealen und der Kehlkopfmuskulatur durch das PET-CT. Chirurg 79:291–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Stelzner F (1998) Die aganglionäre Hochdruckzone am Ösophagusmund und der angiomuskuläre Dehnverschluß der Speiseröhre. In: Stelzner F (ed) Chirurgie an viszeralen Abschlusssystemen. Thieme Stuttgart, New York, pp 30–77

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lundell L, Myers JC, Jamieson GG (1996) Is motility impaired in the entire upper gastrointestinal tract in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease? Scand J Gastroenterol 31:131–135

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rydberg L, Ruth M, Lundell L (1997) Does oesophageal motor function improve with time after successful antrireflux surgery? Results of a prospective, randomised clinical study. Gut 41:82–86

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Booth M, Stratford J, Dehn TCB (2002) Preoperative esophageal body motility does not influence the outcome of laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for gastresophageal reflux disease. Dis Esophagus 15:57–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Patti MG, Perretta S, Fisichella PM, D'Avanzo A, Galvani C, Gorodner V, Way LW (2003) Laparoscopic antireflux surgery: preoperative lower esophageal sphincter pressure does not affect outcome. Surg Endosc 17:386–389

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. An evidence-based appraisal of reflux disease management—the Genval Workshop Report. (1999) Gut 44(Suppl 2):1–16

  23. Velanovich V (1998) Comparison of generic (SF-36) vs. disease-specific (GERD-HRQL) quality-of-life scales for gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Gastrointest Surg 2:141–145

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Contini S, Bertele A, Nervi G, Zinicola R, Scarpignato C (2002) Quality of life for patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease 2 years after laparoscopic fundoplication. Evaluation of the results obtained during the initial experience. Surg Endosc 16:1555–1560

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Sontag SJ, Hirschowitz BI, Holt S, Robinson MG, Behar J, Berenson MM, McCullough A, Ippoliti AF, Richter JE, Ahtaridis G (1992) Two doses of omeprazole versus placebo in symptomatic erosive esophagitis: the U.S. Multicenter Study. Gastroenterology 102:109–118

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Klinkenberg-Knol EC, Nelis F, Dent J, Snel P, Mitchell B, Prichard P, Lloyd D, Havu N, Frame MH, Roman J, Walan A, Group LT (2000) Long-term omeprazole treatment in resistant gastroesophageal reflux disease: efficacy, safety, and influence on gastric mucosa. Gastroenterology 118:661–669

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Nissen R (1956) Eine einfache Operation zur Beeinflussung der Refluxösophagitis. Schweiz Med Wochenschr 86(Suppl 20):590–592

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. DeMeester TR, Bonavina L, Albertucci M (1986) Nissen fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Evaluation of primary repair in 100 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 204:9–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Toupet A (1963) Technique d'oesophago-gastroplastic avec phrenogastric appliqueé dans la cureradicale des hernies hiatalis et comme complement de l'operation d'Heller dans les cardiospasmes. Mem Acad Chir (Paris) 89:384–389

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Rydberg L, Ruth M, Lundell L (1999) Mechanism of action of antireflux procedures. Br J Surg 86:405–410

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Zugel N, Jung C, Bruer C, Sommer P, Breitschaft K (2002) A comparison of laparoscopic Toupet versus Nissen fundoplication in gastroesophageal reflux disease. Langenbeck's Arch Surg 386:494–498

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Jobe BA, Horvath KD, Swanstrom LL (1998) Postoperative function following laparoscopic Collis gastroplasty for shortened esophagus. Arch Surg 133:867–874

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Deviere J, Costamagna G, Neuhaus H, Voderholzer W, Louis H, Tringali A, Marchese M, Fiedler T, Darb-Esfahani P, Schumacher B (2005) Nonresorbable copolymer implantation for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a randomized sham-controlled multicenter trial. Gastroenterology 128:532–540

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Corley DA, Katz P, Wo JM, Stefan A, Patti M, Rothstein R, Edmundowicz S, Kline M, Mason R, Wolfe MM (2003) Improvement of gastroesophageal reflux symptoms after radiofrequency energy: a randomized, sham-controlled trial. Gastroenterology 125:668–676

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Herz Jesu-Krankenhaus Muenster-Hiltrup, Westfalenstrasse 109, 48151, Muenster, Germany

    R. Horstmann, C. Classen & S. Röttgermann

  2. Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstruction Surgery, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany

    M. Langer

  3. Department of General Surgery, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany

    D. Palmes

Authors
  1. R. Horstmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. Classen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. Röttgermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Langer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D. Palmes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Horstmann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Horstmann, R., Classen, C., Röttgermann, S. et al. Long-term experience of treating 185 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) by anti-reflux surgery respecting the functional–morphological restoration of the esophagus. Langenbecks Arch Surg 391, 24–31 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-005-0002-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-005-0002-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation