Jeyarajah, D. Rohan

Background: The study aims to evaluate the postoperative outcomes of hiatal hernia repair with cruroplasty alone compared to the addition of fundoplication. We theorize that previously reported inferiority with crural-only repairs resulted from a lack of real-time feedback regarding the effectiveness of the repair. EndoFLIP TM allows for intraoperative assessment of the gastroesophageal junction. We predict equivalent postoperative outcomes will be achieved between hiatal hernia repairs performed by cruroplasty alone and with fundoplication when the final distensibility index (DI) is similar. Methods: This retrospective cohort review includes patients who underwent hiatal hernia repair with intraoperative EndoFLIP TM between 2020 and 2022. Propensity score-matching was utilized to identify cruroplasty alone and fundoplication patients with a final DI within 0.5 mm 2 /mmHg of one another. Postoperative development of dysphagia, reflux, or hernia recurrence were primary outcomes of interest. Results: Forty-two patients were included in the analysis. While the cruroplasty-alone cohort had an increased age at the time of surgery, 50% more redo repairs, and a slightly higher BMI, there were no significant preoperative or intraoperative differences between groups. Overall, the median duration of follow-up was 111 (IQR 213) days. During that time, there were no differences in the development of postoperative reflux or dysphagia between cohorts ( P = .228 and P = .451, respectively). Kaplan-Meier curve analysis did not demonstrate a significant difference in time-to-event for either outcome. There were 3 radiographic recurrences, with 2 occurring after fundoplication ( P = .000). Conclusions: This is the first study to utilize intraoperative EndoFLIP TM to determine the need for fundoplication during hiatal hernia repair. The results demonstrate no additional short-term benefit from fundoplication performance. These findings argue against routine fundoplication when an acceptable DI can be achieved after cruroplasty. Further research is needed to validate these results.

Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019). Summary Background Data: MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking. Methods: The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology. Results: After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety. Conclusion: The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.