Laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) vs. conventional laparoscopic fundoplication for GERD: is there a difference?

Area of Science:

• Gastroenterology
• Minimally Invasive Surgery
• Surgical Innovation

Background:

• Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) management often involves surgical intervention.
• Conventional laparoscopic fundoplication is a standard treatment.
• Evaluating novel minimally invasive techniques is crucial for improving patient outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

• To assess the safety and efficacy of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) fundoplication for GERD.
• To compare LESS fundoplication outcomes with conventional laparoscopic fundoplication.

Main Methods:

• A retrospective comparison of 130 consecutive LESS fundoplications with 130 contiguous conventional laparoscopic fundoplications.
• Patient-reported symptom scores were collected before and after both procedures.
• Outcomes, including complications and cosmesis, were analyzed.

Main Results:

• LESS fundoplication demonstrated no conversions to open surgery or significant complications.
• Both LESS and conventional laparoscopic fundoplication led to dramatic symptom reduction.
• 96% of LESS fundoplication patients rated their incision appearance favorably (≥8/10).

Conclusions:

• LESS fundoplication is a safe and effective alternative to conventional laparoscopy for GERD.
• The procedure offers comparable symptom improvement with superior cosmetic outcomes.
• LESS surgery provides excellent symptom resolution and minimal scarring.