• Surgical endoscopy · Jan 2003

    Clinical Trial Controlled Clinical Trial

    Does major depression in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease affect the outcome of laparoscopic antireflux surgery?

    • T Kamolz, F A Granderath, and R Pointner.
    • Division of Clinical Psychology, Department of General Surgery, Public Hospital of Zell am See, Paracelsusstr. 8, A-5700 Zell am See, Austria. kamolz@utanet.at
    • Surg Endosc. 2003 Jan 1; 17 (1): 55-60.

    BackgroundIt is known that psychological factors can affect end points of surgical treatment. The current study aimed to evaluate the outcome of laparoscopic antireflux surgery (LARS) in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) who experience concomitant major depression in comparison with GERD patients who have no known comorbidity.MethodsAmong a sample of more than 550 patients who underwent LARS, a group of 38 GERD patients with concomitant major depression (MD) were included in this study. The patients included 24 women and 14 men, with a mean age of 51 years. A group of 38 control patients (non-MD) matched in terms of age, gender, and esophageal manometry findings was selected from the database for comparison of surgical outcomes between patients with GERD accompanied by concomitant major depression and GERD patients with no known comorbidity. In each group, 23 patients received a Toupet fundoplication and 15 patients underwent a "floppy" Nissen fundoplication. The following factors were evaluated before surgery, 3 months afterward, and 1 year after LARS: symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation, chest pain, bloating, and dysphagia), quality of life (Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index [GIQLI]), lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP), and 24-h pH monitoring (DeMeester score).ResultsBefore and after surgery, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of LESP and DeMeester score. Preoperative GIQLI showed significant differences (p < 0.05) between the two groups (MD group, 71.8 +/- 8.6 vs non-MD group, 91.1 +/- 9.8), and significant differences (p < 0.01-0.001) between the mean data and that for healthy individuals (122.6 +/- 8.5). The GIQLI scores had improved significantly at 3 months and at 1 year after surgery (p < 0.05-0.001) in all the patients (1 year postoperatively: MD group, 99.3 +/- 8.6 vs non-MD group, 121.9 +/- 9.7). Before surgery, when symptoms were compared between the two groups, significant differences (p < 0.001) were found in the percentage of chest pain (81.6% vs 37.4%) and bloating (92.2% vs 37.4%), showing that these symptoms were more predominant and graded as much more severe among patients with MD. In both groups, all the symptoms but dysphagia showed a significant improvement in severity (p < 0.05-0.0001). A comparison of both groups postoperatively showed that significant differences were still present in chest pain (44.7% vs 2.6%), bloating (68.4% vs 18.4), and dysphagia (50.1% vs 2.6%). A significant difference (p < 0.001) was observed only in patients with major depression and depending on the kind of wrap procedure (Nissen vs Toupet), showing that dysphagia (78.9% vs 21.1%) and chest pain (82.4% vs 17.6%) were much more predominant in patients who underwent "floppy" Nissen fundoplication.ConclusionsEven if they are good surgical candidates from a physiologic point of view, GERD patients with concomitant major depression should be selected carefully. In these patients, LARS can normalize physiologic data, but some patients have demonstrated less symptomatic relief, suffered from postoperative dysphagia, and showed less quality-of-life improvement. Eventually, laparoscopic Toupet fundoplication used with these patients could result in a better subjective outcome.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…