Overall satisfaction following laparoscopic fundoplication for patients with atypical extraesophageal symptoms: A comparative cohort study.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY World Journal of Surgery Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-27 DOI:10.1002/wjs.12415
Jamie Hua, Tanya Irvine, Sarah K Thompson, Tim Bright, David I Watson
{"title":"Overall satisfaction following laparoscopic fundoplication for patients with atypical extraesophageal symptoms: A comparative cohort study.","authors":"Jamie Hua, Tanya Irvine, Sarah K Thompson, Tim Bright, David I Watson","doi":"10.1002/wjs.12415","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Some patients with gastroesophageal reflux (GERD) experience extraesophageal symptoms, which are considered due to laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). Most studies evaluating fundoplication for LPR report outcomes from individuals who also have typical esophageal GERD symptoms. Information is limited for patients with LPR but no GERD symptoms. To determine whether LPR patients benefit from fundoplication outcomes were determined for individuals with LPR ± GERD and also those without LPR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients undergoing fundoplication from 1997 to 2015 were identified and divided into three symptom groups: LPR only, LPR and GERD, and GERD only. Heartburn, dysphagia, and satisfaction were assessed using 0-10 analog scores and compared at short (1-2 years) and later (5 years) follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>2204 patients underwent fundoplication. 24 patients had LPR only, 130 patients had LPR and GERD, and matched to 1319 patients with GERD only. At 1-2 years follow-up, the LPR only group had lower satisfaction scores than those with GERD symptoms (± concurrent LPR) (7.00 ± 3.49 vs. 8.41 ± 2.42, p = 0.019, and mean ± s.d.). At 1-2 years, 68.1% of the LPR only group had a good outcome (satisfaction score: 7-10) versus 84.6% with LPR and GERD and 84.1% with GERD only.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>At 1-2 years follow-up, patients with LPR only were less satisfied following fundoplication compared with patients with typical GERD (±LPR). However, some patients with LPR only did benefit and might be considered for surgery if appropriately counseled. Outcomes were similar for patients with LPR and typical GERD and those with only typical symptoms.</p>","PeriodicalId":23926,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"66-73"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wjs.12415","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Some patients with gastroesophageal reflux (GERD) experience extraesophageal symptoms, which are considered due to laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). Most studies evaluating fundoplication for LPR report outcomes from individuals who also have typical esophageal GERD symptoms. Information is limited for patients with LPR but no GERD symptoms. To determine whether LPR patients benefit from fundoplication outcomes were determined for individuals with LPR ± GERD and also those without LPR.

Methods: Patients undergoing fundoplication from 1997 to 2015 were identified and divided into three symptom groups: LPR only, LPR and GERD, and GERD only. Heartburn, dysphagia, and satisfaction were assessed using 0-10 analog scores and compared at short (1-2 years) and later (5 years) follow-up.

Results: 2204 patients underwent fundoplication. 24 patients had LPR only, 130 patients had LPR and GERD, and matched to 1319 patients with GERD only. At 1-2 years follow-up, the LPR only group had lower satisfaction scores than those with GERD symptoms (± concurrent LPR) (7.00 ± 3.49 vs. 8.41 ± 2.42, p = 0.019, and mean ± s.d.). At 1-2 years, 68.1% of the LPR only group had a good outcome (satisfaction score: 7-10) versus 84.6% with LPR and GERD and 84.1% with GERD only.

Conclusion: At 1-2 years follow-up, patients with LPR only were less satisfied following fundoplication compared with patients with typical GERD (±LPR). However, some patients with LPR only did benefit and might be considered for surgery if appropriately counseled. Outcomes were similar for patients with LPR and typical GERD and those with only typical symptoms.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
非典型食管外症状患者接受腹腔镜胃底折叠术后的总体满意度:一项队列比较研究。
背景:一些胃食管反流 (GERD) 患者会出现食管外症状,这被认为是由于喉咽反流 (LPR) 引起的。大多数评估胃底折叠术治疗 LPR 的研究都报告了同时具有典型食管胃食管反流症状的患者的治疗结果。关于无胃食管反流症状的 LPR 患者的信息则非常有限。为了确定 LPR 患者是否能从胃底折叠术中获益,我们对患有 LPR 和胃食管反流病的患者以及没有 LPR 的患者进行了结果评估:方法: 对 1997 年至 2015 年期间接受胃底折叠术的患者进行识别,并将其分为三个症状组:仅 LPR、LPR 和胃食管反流以及仅胃食管反流。使用 0-10 模拟评分对烧心、吞咽困难和满意度进行评估,并在短期(1-2 年)和后期(5 年)随访中进行比较。结果:2204 名患者接受了胃底折叠术,其中 24 名仅患有 LPR,130 名患有 LPR 和胃食管反流病,1319 名仅患有胃食管反流病。在 1-2 年的随访中,仅有 LPR 组的满意度评分低于有胃食管反流症状(± 并发 LPR)的患者(7.00 ± 3.49 vs. 8.41 ± 2.42,p = 0.019,平均值 ± s.d.)。1-2年后,68.1%的仅有LPR的患者疗效良好(满意度评分:7-10分),而有LPR和胃食管反流病的患者为84.6%,仅有胃食管反流病的患者为84.1%:结论:在 1-2 年的随访中,与典型胃食管反流患者(±LPR)相比,仅 LPR 患者在胃底折叠术后的满意度较低。不过,一些仅有 LPR 的患者确实从中受益,如果得到适当的指导,他们可能会考虑接受手术治疗。患有 LPR 和典型胃食管反流病的患者与仅有典型症状的患者的疗效相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World Journal of Surgery
World Journal of Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.80%
发文量
460
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: World Journal of Surgery is the official publication of the International Society of Surgery/Societe Internationale de Chirurgie (iss-sic.com). Under the editorship of Dr. Julie Ann Sosa, World Journal of Surgery provides an in-depth, international forum for the most authoritative information on major clinical problems in the fields of clinical and experimental surgery, surgical education, and socioeconomic aspects of surgical care. Contributions are reviewed and selected by a group of distinguished surgeons from across the world who make up the Editorial Board.
期刊最新文献
Observational Study of Curative Effects Between Complete Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery and Conservative Treatment for Multiple Rib Fractures in Non-Frail Chests. On the Shoulders of Giants: The Specialist Surgeon Workforce in East, Central and Southern Africa. Simulation to Scalpel: A Systematic Review of True Evidence of Skills Transfer as Seen Through the Lens of Patient Outcomes. Adoption of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Practices for Colorectal Procedures: A Nationwide Assessment in Ukraine. Risk of Cancer Recurrence Exerts the Strongest Influence on Choice Between Active Surveillance and Thyroid Surgery as Initial Treatment for Low-Risk Thyroid Cancer: Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1