An integrated approach to treatment of patients with complicated forms of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Cover Page
Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract


Aim. To justify the appropriateness of applying the integrated algorithm of treatment, including the sequential application of conservative antireflux treatment and antireflux surgery, in patients with complicated forms of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Methods. The main group of the study included 554 patients with complicated forms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (erosive esophagitis in 301, peptic stricture in 36, Barrett's esophagus in 90 and a combination of several complications in 127 patients), and the control group included 229 patients with uncomplicated gastroesophageal reflux disease and indications for surgical treatment. At the diagnostic stage, fiberoptic esophagogastroduodenoscopy with chromoendoscopy using a double dye staining technique (Lugol and methylene blue) and biopsies of ­areas suspicious for metaplasia, as well as a barium contrast multi-positional radiographic examination of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction were used. At the treatment stage, both groups received conservative antireflux treatment lasting 4–8 weeks, comprising lifestyle regulation, diet, antisecretory drug therapy (proton pump inhi­bitors — omeprazole or rabeprazole 20 mg orally twice a day, antispasmodic agent — domperidone 20 mg orally 3 times a day or itopride 50 mg orally 3 times a day), followed by either laparotomic or laparoscopic antireflux surgery. In the main group, antireflux surgery was supplemented with endoscopic argon plasma coagulation during the postoperative period in the patients with Barrett's esophagus and esophageal bougienage under endoscopic control during the pre- and postoperative period in the patients with a peptic stricture.

Results. The frequency of intraoperative [6.3% (95% CI 1.4–5.8%), p=0.0462] and early postoperative complications [41.5% (95% CI 37.4–45.7%), p=0.0011] in the main group were statistically significantly higher than in the control group. There was no clinically important difference. Frequency of late postoperative complications in the main group [5.4% (95% CI 3.7–7.6%)] did not have statistically significant differences from the control (p=0.1239). The integrated algorithm of treatment has proven to be safe with provision for the need to develop measures to reduce the overall incidence of early postoperative complications. Excellent and satisfactory immediate treatment results were achieved in 91.7% (95% CI 89.1–93.9%), and excellent and satisfactory long-term results were achieved in 91.3% (95% CI 88.7–93.5%) patients of the main group, and were statistically significantly worse than in the control group, p=0.0008 and p=0.0021 for the immediate and long-term results, respectively. The difference was attribu­table to the extremely high efficiency of the treatment algorithm in the control group and had no clinical significance.

Conclusion. The use of the integrated algorithm of treatment based on the implementation of antireflux surgery is appropriate in all patients with complicated forms of gastroesophageal reflux disease.


Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

A A Moroshek

Volga Region Branch of Russian Cancer Research Center named after N.N. Blokhin

Author for correspondence.
Email: anton.moroshek@mail.ru

Russian Federation, Kazan, Russia

M V Burmistrov

Republican Clinical Hospital

Email: anton.moroshek@mail.ru

Russian Federation, Kazan, Russia

References

  1. Bagnenko S.F., Vasilevskiy D.I., Kulagin V.I. Khi­rurgicheskoe lechenie gastroezofageal'noy reflyuksnoy bolezni. (Surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux di­sease.) Guide for doctors. M.: Litres. 2019; 218 р. (In Russ.)
  2. Dent J., El-Serag H.B., Wallander M.-A. et al. Epidemiology of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review. Gut. 2005; 54: 710–717. doi: 10.1136/gut.2004.051821.
  3. Bordin D.S., Kolbasnikov S.V. Gastroesophageal reflux disease: from pathogenesis to treatment. Lechashchiy vrach. 2018; (7): 34. (In Russ.)
  4. Labenz J., Chandrasoma P.T., Knapp L.J., DeMeester T.R. Proposed approach to the challenging ma­nagement of progressive gastroesophageal reflux disease. World J. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2018; 10 (9): 175. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v10.i9.175.
  5. Fein M., Ritter M.P., DeMeester T.R. et al. Role of the lower esophageal sphincter and hiatal hernia in the pathogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease. J. Gastrointest. Surg.: Official Journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. 1999; 3: 405–410. doi: 10.1016/s1091-255x(99)80057-2.
  6. Vasilevsky D.I., Balandov S.G., Davletbaeva L.I., Tarbaev I.S. Barrett's esophagus and esophageal carcinoma. Is that a real problem? Rossiyskie biomeditsinskie issledovaniya. 2018; 3 (2): 28–35. (In Russ.)
  7. Sharapov T.L., Burmistrov M.V., Sigal E.I. et al. Prevention of complications of anti-reflux surgery. Endosko­picheskaya khirurgiya. 2012; (3): 9–14. (In Russ.)
  8. Yurasov A.V., Shestakov A.L., Bitarov T.T. The indications for the surgical treatment of reflux-esophagitis. Dokazatel'naya gastroenterologiya. 2018; 7 (2): 30–34. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17116/dokgastro20187230.
  9. Seo H.S., Choi M., Son S.-Y. et al. Evidence-based practice guideline for surgical treatment of gastroesopha­geal reflux disease 2018. J. Gastric Cancer. 2018; 18 (4): 313–327. doi: 10.5230/jgc.2018.18.e41.

Statistics

Views

Abstract - 66

PDF (Russian) - 2

Cited-By


PlumX

Dimensions


© 2020 Moroshek A.A., Burmistrov M.V.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed
under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.





This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies