Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 33, Issue 1, pp 243–251 | Cite as

A retrospective multicenter analysis on redo-laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery: conservative or conversion fundoplication?

  • Al-Warith Al Hashmi
  • Guillaume Pineton de Chambrun
  • Regis Souche
  • Martin Bertrand
  • Vito De Blasi
  • Eric Jacques
  • Santiago Azagra
  • Jean Michel Fabre
  • Frédéric Borie
  • Michel Prudhomme
  • Nicolas Nagot
  • Francis Navarro
  • Fabrizio PanaroEmail author



Nearly 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).


Data 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® and R software®.


Seventy-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.


Failure 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.


Hiatal hernia Gastroesophageal reflux disease Recurrence Fundoplication 



Hiatal hernia


Gastroesophageal reflux disease


Anti-reflux surgery





The authors thank all the participant centers. Dr. Al Hashmi and Dr. F. Panaro certify that each had a “first author” role equally.


The study sponsors had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Compliance with ethical standards


The authors Al-Warith Al Hashmi, Guillaume Pineton de Chambrun, Regis Souche,Martin Bertrand, Vito De Blasi, Eric Jacques, Santiago Azagra, Jean Michel Fabre, Frédéric Borie, Michel Prudhomme, Nicolas Nagot, Francis Navarro, and Fabrizio Panaro have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.


  1. 1.
    Hunter JG, Trus TL, Branum GD, Waring JP, Wood WC (1996) A physiologic approach to laparoscopic fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Ann Surg 223(6):673–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Peters JH, DeMeester TR, Crookes P, Oberg S, de Vos Shoop M, Hagen JA, Bremmer CG (1998) The treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication: prospective evaluation of 100 patients with “typical” symptoms. Ann Surg 228(1):40–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Viljakka M, Luostarinen M, Isolauri J (1997) Incidence of antireflux surgery in Finland 1988–1993. Influence of proton-pump inhibitors and laparoscopic technique. Scand J Gastroenterol 32(5):415–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Frantzides CT, Carlson MA (1997) Laparoscopic redo Nissen fundoplication. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 7(4):235–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hinder RA, Perdikis G, Klinger PJ, DeVault KR (1997) The surgical option for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Am J Med 103(5A):144S–148SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Laine S, Rantala A, Gullichsen R, Ovaska J (1997) Laparoscopic vs conventional Nissen fundoplication. A prospective randomized study. Surg Endosc 11(5):441–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dallemagne B, Weerts JM, Jehaes C, Markiewicz S (1996) Causes of failures of laparoscopic antireflux operations. Surg Endosc 10(3):305–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dallemagne B, Weerts JM, Jehaes C, Markiewicz S, Lombard R (1996) Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication: preliminary report. Surg Laparosc Enodosc 1991:1:138–143Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Watson DI, de Beaux AC (2001) Complications of laparoscopic antireflux surgery. Surg Endosc 15(4):344–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Soper NJ, Dunnegan D (1999) Anatomic fundoplication failure after laparoscopic antireflux surgery. Ann Surg 229(5):669–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hinder RA, Klingler PJ, Perdikis G, Smith SL (1997) Management of the failed antireflux operation. Surg Clin North Am 77(5):1083–1098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Watson DI, Baigrie RJ, Jamieson GG (1996) A learning curve for laparoscopic fundoplication. Definable, avoidable, or a waste of time? Ann Surg 224(2):198–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hunter JG, Smith CD, Branum GD, Waring JP, Trus TL, Comwell M, Galloway K (1999) Laparoscopic fundoplication failures: patterns of failure and response to fundoplication revision. Ann Surg 230(4):595–604 discussion 604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Floch NR, Hinder RA, Klingler PJ, Branton SA, Seelig MH, Bammer T, Filipi CJ (1999) Is laparoscopic reoperation for failed antireflux surgery feasible? Arch Surg 134(7):733–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Granderath FA, Granderath UM, Pointner R (2008) Laparoscopic revisional fundoplication with circular hiatal mesh prosthesis: the long-term results. World J Surg 32(6):999–1007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Juhasz A, Sundaram A, Hoshino M, Lee TH, Mittal SK (2012) Outcomes of surgical management of symptomatic large recurrent hiatus hernia. Surg Endosc 26(6):1501–1508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Qin M, Ding G, Yang H (2013) A clinical comparison of laparoscopic Nissen and Toupet fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 23(7):601–604. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Strate U, Emmermann A, Fibbe C, Layer P, Zornig C (2008) Laparoscopic fundoplication: Nissen versus Toupet two-year outcome of a prospective randomized study of 200 patients regarding preoperative esophageal motility. Surg Endosc 22(1):21–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nageswaran H, Haque A, Zia M, Hassn A (2017) Laparoscopic redo anti-reflux surgery: case-series of different presentations, varied management and their outcomes. Int J Surg 46:(47–52)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Awad ZT, Anderson PI, Sato K, Roth TA, Gerhardt J, Filipi CJ (2001) Laparoscopic reoperative antireflux surgery. Surg Endosc 15(12):1401–1407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Banki F, Kaushik C, Roife D, Chawla M, Casimir R, Miller CC (2016) Laparoscopic reoperative antireflux surgery: a safe procedure with high patient satisfaction and low morbidity. Am J Surg 212(6):1115–1120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Frantzides CT, Madan AK, Carlson MA, Stavropoulos GP (2002) A prospective, randomized trial of laparoscopic polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) patch repair vs simple cruroplasty for large hiatal hernia. Arch Surg 137(6):649–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Perez AR, Moncure AC, Rattner DW (2001) Obesity adversely affects the outcome of antireflux operations. Surg Endosc 15(9):986–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Akimoto S, Nandipati KC, Kapoor H, Yamamoto SR, Pallati PK, Mittal SK (2015) Association of Body Mass Index (BMI) with patterns of fundoplication failure: insights gained. J Gastrointest Surg 19(11):1943–1948. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Byrne JP, Smithers BM, Nathanson LK, Martin I, Ong HS, Gotley DC (2005) Symptomatic and functional outcome after laparoscopic reoperation for failed antireflux surgery. Br J Surg 92(8):996–1001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Watson DI, Jamieson GG, Game PA, Williams RS, Devitt PG (1999) Laparoscopic reoperation following failed antireflux surgery. Br J Surg 86(1):98–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Serafini FM, Bloomston M, Zervos E, Muench J, Albrink MH, Murr M, Rosemurgy AS (2001) Laparoscopic revision of failed antireflux operations. J Surg Res 95(1):13–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Granderath FA, Kamolz T, Schweiger UM, Pointner R (2003) Failed antireflux surgery: quality of life and surgical outcome afterlaparoscopic refundoplication. Int J Colorectal Dis 18(3):248–253Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Papasavas PK, Yeaney WW, Landreneau RJ, Hayetian FD, Gagné DJ, Caushaj PF, Macherey R, Bartley S, Maley RH Jr, Keenan RJ (2004) Reoperative laparoscopic fundoplication for the treatment of failed fundoplication. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 128(4):509–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Oelschlager BK, Lal DR, Jensen E, Cahill M, Quiroga E, Pellegrini CA (2006) Medium- and long-term outcome of laparoscopicredo fundoplication. Surg Endosc 20(12):1817–1823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Khajanchee YS, O’Rourke R, Cassera MA, Gatta P, Hansen PD, Swanström LL (2007) Laparoscopic reintervention for failed antireflux surgery: subjective and objective outcomes in 176 consecutivepatients. Arch Surg 142(8):785–901 discussion 791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Safranek PM, Gifford CJ, Booth MI, Dehn TC (2007) Results of laparoscopic reoperation for failed antireflux surgery: does the indication for redo surgery affect the outcome? Dis Esophagus 20(4):341–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Al-Warith Al Hashmi
    • 1
  • Guillaume Pineton de Chambrun
    • 2
  • Regis Souche
    • 3
  • Martin Bertrand
    • 4
  • Vito De Blasi
    • 5
  • Eric Jacques
    • 6
  • Santiago Azagra
    • 5
  • Jean Michel Fabre
    • 3
  • Frédéric Borie
    • 4
  • Michel Prudhomme
    • 4
  • Nicolas Nagot
    • 7
  • Francis Navarro
    • 1
  • Fabrizio Panaro
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Division of HBP Surgery and Transplantation (A), Department of Surgery, Hôpital Saint EloiCHU-MontpellierMontpellierFrance
  2. 2.Division of Gastroenterology-Endoscopy (B), Department of Gastroenterology, Hôpital Saint EloiCHU-MontpellierMontpellierFrance
  3. 3.Division of Upper GI and Mini-Invasive Surgery (A), Department of Surgery, Hôpital Saint EloiCHU-MontpellierMontpellierFrance
  4. 4.Division of Upper GI Surgery, Department of SurgeryCHU-NimesNîmesFrance
  5. 5.Division of General and Mini-Invasive SurgeryCHL-LuxembourgLuxembourg CityLuxembourg
  6. 6.Division of Digestive and Mini-Invasive SurgeryClinique Beau SoleilMontpellierFrance
  7. 7.Department of Statistical Analysis UnitCHU-MontpellierMontpellierFrance

Personalised recommendations