ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019
A retrospective multicenter analysis on redo-laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery: conservative or conversion fundoplication?
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of outcomes of minimally invasive vs. open surgery in patients with symptomatic hiatal hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Management of recurrent hiatal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing mesh versus no mesh reinforcement.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Pooled it
- International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus consensus on management of the failed fundoplication.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2024Guideline
- Long-term efficacy of total versus posterior partial fundoplication in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2024Pooled it
- SAGES guidelines for the surgical treatment of hiatal hernias.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Guideline
- Management of symptomatic, asymptomatic, and recurrent hiatal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Short term safety and efficacy of robot-assisted laparoscopic redo hiatal hernia repair without mesh: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic revision to Toupet fundoplication for failed Nissen fundoplication: a single-center experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of robotic vs laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Results from the national prospective trial ROBOCOSTES.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Observational
- Long-term results after laparoscopic revision fundoplication: a retrospective, single-center analysis in 194 patients with recurrent hiatal hernia.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2024Article
- Is the robotic approach the future of distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy? A propensity score matched analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- ChatGPT: Friend or foe in medical writing? An example of how ChatGPT can be utilized in writing case reports.Surgery in practice and science · 2023Article
- Robotic revision surgery after failed Nissen anti-reflux surgery: a single center experience and a literature review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Review
- Redo fundoplication vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass conversion for failed anti-reflux surgery: which is better?Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Transoral incisionless fundoplication for recurrent symptoms after laparoscopic fundoplication.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- A Rare Occurrence of Rotational Retro-Esophageal Gastric Body Herniation Through a Nissen Fundoplication.Cureus · 2022Article
- Characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing paraesophageal hernia repair with selective use of biologic mesh.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- LAPAROSCOPIC REDO FUNDOPLICATION ALONE, REDO NISSEN FUNDOPLICATION, OR TOUPET FUNDOPLICATION COMBINED WITH ROUX-EN-Y DISTAL GASTRECTOMY FOR TREATMENT OF FAILED NISSEN FUNDOPLICATION.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2022Article
- Less is more: cruroplasty alone is sufficient for revisional hiatal hernia surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Best reoperative strategy for failed fundoplication: redo fundoplication or conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric diversion?Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNearly 20% of patients who undergo hiatal hernia (HH) repair and anti-reflux surgery (ARS) report recurrent HH at long-term follow-up and may be candidates for redo surgery. Current literature on redo-ARS has limitations due to small sample sizes or single center experiences. This type of redo surgery is challenging due to rare but severe complications. Furthermore, the optimal technique for redo-ARS remains debatable. The purpose of the current multicenter study was to review the outcomes of redo-fundoplication and to identify the best ARS repair technique for recurrent HH and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).
methodsData on 975 consecutive patients undergoing hiatal hernia and GERD repair were retrospectively collected in five European high-volume centers. Patient data included demographics, BMI, techniques of the first and redo surgeries (mesh/type of ARS), perioperative morbidity, perioperative complications, duration of hospitalization, time to recurrence, and follow-up. We analyzed the independent risk factors associated with recurrent symptoms and complications during the last ARS. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism
resultsSeventy-three (7.49%) patients underwent redo-ARS during the last decade; 71 (98%) of the surgeries were performed using a minimally invasive approach. Forty-two (57.5%) had conversion from Nissen to Toupet. In 17 (23.3%) patients, the initial Nissen fundoplication was conserved. The initial Toupet fundoplication was conserved in 9 (12.3%) patients, and 5 (6.9%) had conversion of Toupet to Nissen. Out of the 73 patients, 10 (13%) underwent more than one redo-ARS. At 8.5 (1-107) months of follow-up, patients who underwent reoperation with Toupet ARS were less symptomatic during the postoperative period compared to those who underwent Nissen fundoplication (p = 0.005, OR 0.038). Patients undergoing mesh repair during the redo-fundoplication (21%) were less symptomatic during the postoperative period (p = 0.020, OR 0.010). The overall rate of complications (Clavien-Dindo classification) after redo surgery was 11%. Multivariate analysis showed that the open approach (p = 0.036, OR 1.721), drain placement (p = 0.0388, OR 9.308), recurrence of dysphagia (p = 0.049, OR 8.411), and patient age (p = 0.0619, OR 1.111) were independent risk factors for complications during the last ARS.
conclusionsFailure of ARS rarely occurs in the hands of experienced surgeons. Redo-ARS is feasible using a minimally invasive approach. According to our study, in terms of recurrence of symptoms, Toupet fundoplication is a superior ARS technique compared to Nissen for redo-fundoplication. Therefore, Toupet fundoplication should be considered in redo interventions for patients who initially underwent ARS with Nissen fundoplication. Furthermore, mesh repair in reoperations has a positive impact on reducing the recurrence of symptoms postoperatively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.