The purpose of this study is to compare the effects (good and bad) of the Laparoscopic Hill anti-reflux procedure with the Laparoscopic Nissen anti-reflux surgical procedure to see whether one is better than the other.
The design is a two-armed prospective single-blinded comparison between the two procedures, performed and randomized independently at the Swedish Medical Center Cancer Institute in Seattle, WA, and at Legacy Health Systems in Portland, OR, in adult patients with uncomplicated gastroesophageal reflux failing medical management. A standardized operative technique for each procedures will be utilized at both institutions, and will include intraoperative manometrics and intraoperative photographic documentation of the gastroesophageal valve, as well as placement of clips at the GE junction to accurately identify its location post-operatively. To eliminate "expertise" bias, the investigator from each institution will participate in up to 50 of the first of each of the two procedures.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
121
With the Hill repair, stitches are placed right where the esophagus and stomach meet and attached to muscle tissue that is fixed to the spine.
With the Nissen repair, the upper part of the stomach is wrapped around the esophagus, with some anchoring of the wrap at several locations.
Swedish Medical Center Cancer Institute
Seattle, Washington, United States
Determine whether Laparoscopic Hill repair is as effective as Nissen fundoplication for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).
Comparison of these two surgical procedures will be based on pre- and post-surgery quality of life questionnaires, manometry (test that measures muscle pressures in the lower esophagus), pH testing, operative time, early complication rates, and length of hospital stay.
Time frame: 1 year
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.