Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Heller myotomy perforation: robotic visualization decreases perforation rate and revisional surgery is a perforation risk

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has improved surgical access to the foregut. While the benefits of MIS versus open surgery are well accepted, the relative benefits of laparoscopic versus robotic approaches continue to be debated. Procedure-specific comparisons are difficult to obtain for Heller myotomy, due to the relative rarity of the procedure in most practices. A retrospective review of prospectively collected perioperative data of a single surgical practice from 2001 to 2019 was conducted for the rate of perforation during Heller myotomy laparoscopically compared to robotically. From 2001 through February 2012, a laparoscopic approach was employed and from October 2008 to 2019, a robotic approach was employed. All perforations were recorded, as well as secondary outcomes of perforation location (gastric or esophageal), postoperative imaging for evidence of leak, length of stay, and complications. Chi-square and simple t test were employed for data analysis. During the 11 years of laparoscopic Heller myotomy, 14 cases resulted in 7 instances of perforation (50%). During the 11 years of robotic Heller myotomy, 45 cases resulted in 11 instances of perforation (24%) (p value = 0.06). All perforations in both groups were tiny, recognized, and repaired immediately. The length of stay (LOS) was longer in the laparoscopic perforation group (3.4 days) compared to the laparoscopic non-perforation group (1.2 days) (p value = 0.06). LOS for robotic was not significantly longer in the perforation group (2.8 days) compared to the robotic non-perforation group (1.5 days) (p value = 0.18). First time Heller myotomies showed a higher rate of perforation with laparoscopic (50%) vs robotic (14%) (p value = 0.009) approach. In subgroup analysis of revisional procedures, all ten were performed robotically (p value < 0.001) with a 60% perforation rate (p value = 0.001) and one associated, radiographically confirmed leak. Primary laparoscopic Heller myotomy related to more than four times the frequency of perforation than did primary robotic myotomy. We propose that the robotic platform provided the surgeon with superior ability to avoid perforation. Interestingly, the robotic group in this study dealt with more complex redo cases. In fact, reoperation in the area of the hiatus was a separate risk factor for perforation during robotic Heller myotomy. We recommend further prospective trials be done to better evaluate the benefits of robotic platform in regard to revisional foregut surgery.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Markar SR, Karthikesalingam AP, Hagen ME, Talamini M, Horgan S, Wagner OJ (2010) Robotic vs. laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 6(2):125–131. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.309

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Toro JP, Lin E, Patel AD (2014) Review of robotics in foregut and bariatric surgery. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3646-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wilson EB (2009) The evolution of robotic general surgery. Scand J Surg 98(2):125–129. https://doi.org/10.1177/145749690909800208

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Soliman BG, Nguyen DT, Chan EY et al (2020) Robot-assisted hiatal hernia repair demonstrates favorable short-term outcomes compared to laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair. Surg Endosc 34(6):2495–2502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-07055-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Melvin WS, Needleman BJ, Krause KR et al (2002) Computer-enhanced robotic telesurgery: initial experience in foregut surgery. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 16(12):1790–1792. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-8192-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ito F, Gould JC (2006) Robotic foregut surgery. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 2(4):287–292. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Arora Z, Thota PN, Sanaka MR (2017) Achalasia: current therapeutic options. Ther Adv Chronic Dis 8(6–7):101–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/2040622317710010

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Jeon HH, Kim JH, Youn YH, Park H, Conklin JL (2017) Clinical characteristics of patients with untreated achalasia. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 23(3):378–384. https://doi.org/10.5056/jnm16177

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Burmeister S (2013) Review of current diagnosis and management of diffuse esophageal spasm, nutcracker esophagus/spastic nutcracker and hypertensive lower esophageal sphincter. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 21(6):543–547. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOO.0000000000000002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Almansa C, Hinder RA, Smith CD, Achem SR (2008) A comprehensive appraisal of the surgical treatment of diffuse esophageal spasm. J Gastrointest Surg 12(6):1133–1145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-007-0439-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Roman S, Huot L, Zerbib F et al (2016) High-resolution manometry improves the diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders in patients with dysphagia: a randomized multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 111(3):372–380. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2016.1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Oude Nijhuis RAB, Zaninotto G, Roman S et al (2020) European Guideline on Achalasia—UEG and ESNM recommendations. United Eur Gastroenterol J 8(1):13–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050640620903213

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Chrystoja CC, Darling GE, Diamant NE et al (2016) Achalasia-specific quality of life after pneumatic dilation or laparoscopic heller myotomy with partial fundoplication: a multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Am J Gastroenterol 111(11):1536–1545. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2016.402

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Persson J, Johnsson E, Kostic S, Lundell L, Smedh U (2015) Treatment of achalasia with laparoscopic myotomy or pneumatic dilatation: long-term results of a prospective, randomized study. World J Surg 39(3):713–720. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2869-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Zaninotto G, Annese V, Costantini M et al (2004) Randomized controlled trial of botulinum toxin versus laparoscopic heller myotomy for esophageal Achalasia. Ann Surg 239(3):364–370. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000114217.52941.c5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Bello B, Herbella FA, Allaix ME, Patti MG (2012) Impact of minimally invasive surgery on the treatment of benign esophageal disorders. World J Gastroenterol 18(46):6764–6770. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v18.i46.6764

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Schuchert MJ, Luketich JD, Landreneau RJ et al (2008) Minimally-invasive esophagomyotomy in 200 consecutive patients: factors influencing postoperative outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg 85(5):1729–1734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2007.11.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Melvin WS, Needleman BJ, Krause KR, Wolf RK, Michler RE, Ellison EC (2001) Computer-assisted robotic Heller myotomy: initial case report. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech Part A 11(4):251–253. https://doi.org/10.1089/109264201750539790

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Maeso S, Reza M, Mayol JA et al (2010) Efficacy of the da vinci surgical system in abdominal surgery compared with that of laparoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 252(2):254–262. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181e6239e

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Perry KA, Kanji A, Drosdeck JM et al (2014) Efficacy and durability of robotic heller myotomy for achalasia: patient symptoms and satisfaction at long-term follow-up. Surg Endosc 28(11):3162–3167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3576-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Shaligram A, Unnirevi J, Simorov A, Kothari VM, Oleynikov D (2012) How does the robot affect outcomes? A retrospective review of open, laparoscopic, and robotic Heller myotomy for achalasia. Surg Endosc 26(4):1047–1050. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-1994-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Horgan S, Galvani C, Gorodner MV et al (2005) Robotic-assisted Heller myotomy versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy for the treatment of esophageal achalasia: multicenter study. J Gastrointest Surg 9(8):1020–1030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gassur.2005.06.026

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Galvani C, Gorodner MV, Moser F, Baptista M, Donahue P, Horgan S (2006) Laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia facilitated by robotic assistance. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 20(7):1105–1112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-005-0272-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Heller E (1913) Extramucöse cardioplastie beim chronischen cardiospasmus mit dilatation des oesophagus. Mitt Grengeb Med Chir 2:141–149

    Google Scholar 

  25. Falkenback D, Lehane CW, Lord RVN (2015) Robot-assisted oesophageal and gastric surgery for benign disease: antireflux operations and Heller’s myotomy. ANZ J Surg 85(3):113–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.12731

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Huffmanm LC, Pandalai PK, Boulton BJ et al (2007) Robotic Heller myotomy: a safe operation with higher postoperative quality-of-life indices. Surgery 142(4):613–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2007.08.003

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rossetti G, del Genio G, Maffettone V et al (2009) Laparoscopic reoperation with total fundoplication for failed Heller myotomy: is it a possible option? Personal experience and review of literature. Int Surg 94(4):330–334

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rakita S, Bloomston M, Villadolid D, Thometz D, Zervos E, Rosemurgy A (2005) Esophagotomy during laparoscopic Heller myotomy cannot be predicted by preoperative therapies and does not influence long-term outcome. J Gastrointest Surg 9:159–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gassur.2004.10.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Horgan S, Hudda K, Eubanks T, McAllister J, Pellegrini CA (1999) Does botulinum toxin injection make esophagomyotomy a more difficult operation? Surg Endosc 13(6):576–579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004649901044

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Patti MG, Feo CV, Arcerito M et al (1999) Effects of previous treatment on results of laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia. Dig Dis Sci 44(11):2270–2276. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026660921776

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sharp KW, Khaitan L, Scholz S, Holzman MD, Richards WO (2002) 100 Consecutive minimally invasive heller myotomies: lessons learned. Ann Surg 235(5):631–639. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200205000-00004

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Ponce J, Juan M, Garrigues V, Pascual S, Berenguer J (1999) Efficacy and safety of cardiomyotomy in patients with achalasia after failure of pneumatic dilatation. Dig Dis Sci 44(11):2277–2282. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026613005846

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Sparrow Hospital, Michigan State University, 1215 East Michigan Ave, Lansing, MI, 48912, USA

    Abigail J. Engwall-Gill & Tahereh Soleimani

  2. Department of Surgery, HealthPartners, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Sandra S. Engwall

Authors
  1. Abigail J. Engwall-Gill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tahereh Soleimani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sandra S. Engwall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abigail J. Engwall-Gill.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr. Abigail Engwall-Gill and Dr. Tahereh Soliemani have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose. Dr. Sandra Engwall has been a robotic proctor for Intuitive.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Engwall-Gill, A.J., Soleimani, T. & Engwall, S.S. Heller myotomy perforation: robotic visualization decreases perforation rate and revisional surgery is a perforation risk. J Robotic Surg 16, 867–873 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-021-01307-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-021-01307-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation