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

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.