title: Prospective double-blind randomized trial of laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication with division and without division of short gastric vessels.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To determine whether division of the short gastric vessels (SGVs) and full mobilization of the gastric fundus is necessary to reduce the incidence of postoperative dysphagia and other adverse sequelae of laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  Based on historical and uncontrolled studies, division of the SGVs has been advocated during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication to improve postoperative clinical outcomes. However, this modification has not been evaluated in a large prospective randomized trial.
  
  
  METHODS
  One hundred two patients with proven gastroesophageal reflux disease presenting for laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication were prospectively randomized to undergo fundoplication with (52 patients) or without (50 patients) division of the SGVs. Patients with esophageal motility disorders, patients requiring a concurrent abdominal procedure, and patients who had undergone previous antireflux surgery were excluded. Patients were blinded to the postoperative status of their SGVs. Clinical assessment was performed by a blinded independent investigator who used multiple standardized clinical grading systems to assess dysphagia, heartburn, and patient satisfaction 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. Objective measurement of lower esophageal sphincter pressure, esophageal emptying time, and distal esophageal acid exposure and radiologic assessment of postoperative anatomy were also performed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Operating time was increased by 40 minutes (median 65 vs. 105) by vessel division. Perioperative outcomes and complications, postoperative dysphagia, relief of heartburn, and overall satisfaction were not improved by dividing the SGVs. Lower esophageal sphincter pressure, acid exposure, and esophageal emptying times were similar for the two groups.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Division of the SGVs during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication did not improve any clinical or objective postoperative outcome.
authors.affiliation: Royal Adelaide Centre for Endoscopic Surgery and the University Department of Surgery, Royal Adelaide Hospital, South Australia.
authors.forename: D I
authors.initials: DI
authors.lastname: Watson
authors.forename: G K
authors.initials: GK
authors.lastname: Pike
authors.forename: R J
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: Baigrie
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Mathew
authors.forename: P G
authors.initials: PG
authors.lastname: Devitt
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Britten-Jones
authors.forename: G G
authors.initials: GG
authors.lastname: Jamieson
mesh_terms: D003680:Deglutition Disorders / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D018662:Fundoplication / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D015994:Incidence; D008297:Male; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D011300:Preoperative Care; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013270:Stomach / Q000098:blood supply* / Q000601:surgery*