Miotomia laparoscopica secondo Heller per acalasia esofagea. C’è bisogno di una fundoplicatio?

The last decade has witnessed radical changes in the treatment of esophageal achalasia due to the development of minimally invasive techniques. Because of the high success rate of the laparoscopic Heller myotomy, a radical shift in the treatment algorithm of these patients has occurred, and today this is the preferred treatment modality for achalasia. This remarkable change is due to the recognition by gastroenterologists and patients that a laparoscopic Heller myotomy outperforms pneumatic dilatation and intra-sphincteric injection of botulinum toxin injection. While there is agreement about the technique of the myotomy per se, some questions still linger about the need for a fundoplication after the myotomy. The following review describes the data present in the literature in order to identify the best procedure that can achieve relief of dysphagia while avoiding development of gastroesophageal reflux

Riparazione laparoscopica delle ernie paraesofagee: un approccio “evidence-based”

The approach to paraesophageal hernias has drastically changed over the last decade. The goal of this paper is to describe in detail our surgical technique of laparoscopic repair of paraesophageal hernias and to provide an evidence-based approach to the most controversial aspects of this type of repair

Primary Esophageal Motility Disorders: Beyond Achalasia

The best-defined primary esophageal motor disorder is achalasia. However, symptoms such as dysphagia, regurgitation and chest pain can be caused by other esophageal motility disorders. The Chicago classification introduced new manometric parameters and better defined esophageal motility disorders. Motility disorders beyond achalasia with the current classification are: esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction, major disorders of peristalsis (distal esophageal spasm, hypercontractile esophagus, absent contractility) and minor disorders of peristalsis (ineffective esophageal motility, fragmented peristalsis). The aim of this study was to review the current diagnosis and management of esophageal motility disorders other than achalasia

Understanding the Chicago Classification: From Tracings to Patients

Current parameters of the Chicago classification include assessment of the esophageal body (contraction vigour and peristalsis), lower esophageal sphincter relaxation pressure, and intra-bolus pressure pattern. Esophageal disorders include achalasia, esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction, major disorders of peristalsis, and minor disorders of peristalsis. Sub-classification of achalasia in types I, II, and III seems to be useful to predict outcomes and choose the optimal treatment approach. The real clinical significance of other new parameters and disorders is still under investigation

The Intersection of GERD, Aspiration, and Lung Transplantation

Lung transplantation is a radical but life-saving treatment option for patients with end-stage lung diseases, such as idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and scleroderma. In light of the proposed association and controversy linking gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) to IPF and lung transplant outcome, the American Gastroenterological Association convened during the DDW in Washington in May 2015 a multidisciplinary group of experts in the field of GERD and lung transplantation to make considerations about the care of these patients based on available data and subsequent expert panel discussion at this symposium. The following topics were discussed: (1) pathophysiology of GERD-induced pulmonary symptoms, (2) GERD evaluation before and after lung transplantation, (3) outcome of lung transplantation for IPF and scleroderma, and (4) role of laparoscopic fundoplication before or after lung transplantation

High-resolution Manometry Findings in Patients After Sclerotherapy for Esophageal Varices

Background/Aims Endoscopic therapy for esophageal varices may lead to esophageal dysmotility. High-resolution manometry is probably the more adequate tool to measure esophageal motility in these patients. This study aimed to evaluate esophageal motility using high resolution manometry following eradication of esophageal varices by endoscopic sclerotherapy. Methods We studied 21 patients (11 women, age 52 [45-59] years). All patients underwent eradication of esophageal varices with endoscopic sclerotherapy and subsequent high resolution manometry. Results A significant percentage of defective lower esophageal sphincter (basal pressure 14.3 [8.0-20.0] mmHg43% hypertonic) and hypocontractility (distal esophageal amplitude 50 [31-64] mmHgproximal esophageal amplitude 40 [31-61] mmHgdistal contractile integral 617 [403-920] mmHg center dot sec center dot cm48% ineffective) was noticed. Lower sphincter basal pressure and esophageal amplitude correlated inversely with the number of sessions (P < 0.001). No manometric parameter correlated with symptoms or interval between last endoscopy and manometry. Conclusions Esophageal motility after endoscopic sclerotherapy is characterized by: (1) defective lower sphincter and (2) defective and hypotensive peristalsis. Esophageal dysmotility is associated to an increased number of endoscopic sessions, but manometric parameters do not predict symptoms.Univ Fed Sao Paulo, Escola Paulista Med, Dept Surg, Sao Paulo, BrazilUniv Chicago, Dept Surg, 5841 S Maryland Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 USAUniv Fed Sao Paulo, Escola Paulista Med, Dept Surg, Sao Paulo, BrazilWeb of Scienc

Characterization of Mentorship Programs in Departments of Surgery in the United States

Importance Mentorship is considered a key element for career satisfaction and retention in academic surgery. Stakeholders of an effective mentorship program should include the mentor, the mentee, the department, and the institution. Objective The objective of this study was to characterize the status of mentorship programs in departments of surgery in the United States, including the roles of all 4 key stakeholders, because to our knowledge, this has never been done. Design, Setting, and Participants A survey was sent to 155 chairs of departments of surgery in the United States in July 2014 regarding the presence and structure of the mentorship program in their department. The analysis of the data was performed in November 2014 and December 2014. Main Outcomes and Measures Presence and structure of a mentorship program and involvement of the 4 key stakeholders. Results Seventy-six of 155 chairs responded to the survey, resulting in a 49% response rate. Forty-one of 76 of department chairs (54%) self-reported having an established mentorship program. Twenty-five of 76 departments (33%) described no formal or informal pairing of mentors with mentees. In 62 (82%) and 59 (78%) departments, no formal training existed for mentors or mentees, respectively. In 42 departments (55%), there was no formal requirement for the frequency of scheduled meetings between the mentor and mentee. In most departments, mentors and mentees were not required to fill out evaluation forms, but when they did, 28 of 31 were reviewed by the chair (90%). In 70 departments (92%), no exit strategy existed for failed mentor-mentee relationships. In more than two-thirds of departments, faculty mentoring efforts were not recognized formally by either the department or the institution, and only 2 departments (3%) received economic support for the mentoring program from the institution. Conclusions and Relevance These data show that only half of departments of surgery in the United States have established mentorship programs, and most are informal, unstructured, and do not involve all of the key stakeholders. Given the importance of mentorship to career satisfaction and retention, development of formal mentorship programs should be considered for all academic departments of surgery