Redo laparoscopic Heller myotomy and Dor fundoplication versus rescue peroral endoscopic myotomy for esophageal achalasia after failed Heller myotomy: a single-institution experience

Purpose To compare the surgical outcomes of redo laparoscopic Heller-Dor procedure and rescue peroral endoscopic myotomy for patients with failed Heller myotomy. Methods We identified patients who had undergone redo laparoscopic Heller-Dor procedure or rescue peroral endoscopic myotomy from August 1996 to September 2019 and assessed the patients' characteristics, timed barium swallow results, symptom scores before/after surgery, surgical outcomes, and postoperative outcomes. Results Eleven patients underwent redo laparoscopic Heller-Dor procedure, and 14 underwent rescue peroral endoscopic myotomy. Blood loss (p = 0.001) and intraoperative complications rate (p = 0.003) were lower and the operative time (p > 0.001) and observation period (p = 0.009) shorter in patients who underwent rescue peroral endoscopic myotomy than in patients who underwent redo laparoscopic Heller-Dor procedure. Patients who underwent rescue peroral endoscopic myotomy had a higher rate of postoperative reflux esophagitis (p = 0.033) than those who underwent redo laparoscopic Heller-Dor procedure. After the interventions, the dysphagia symptoms were improved for both groups. Furthermore, both groups expressed satisfaction with their respective procedures. Conclusions Rescue peroral endoscopic myotomy was associated with better surgical outcomes than redo laparoscopic Heller-Dor for patients with failed Heller myotomy. However, rescue peroral endoscopic myotomy had higher rates of postoperative reflux esophagitis.

Automated summary

For patients with failed Heller myotomy, rescue peroral endoscopic myotomy showed better surgical outcomes compared to redo laparoscopic Heller-Dor procedure, although it had higher rates of postoperative reflux esophagitis.