OA10.4. Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Transoral Incisionless Fundoplication Versus Robotic Fundoplication for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Associated With Small Hiatal hernias

Clicks: 1
ID: 325699
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #84 of 453 articles by views in diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the international society for diseases of the esophagus

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 453 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Topic Benign Disease: Gastro-Esophageal Reflux and Hiatal Hernia Background Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a prevalent gastrointestinal disorder that often results from altered gastroesophageal junction anatomy and can result in high symptom burdens for patients. While traditional fundoplication is the gold-standard surgical intervention, transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) has emerged as a minimally invasive endoscopic alternative. This study aimed to compare the short- and mid-term outcomes of TIF versus robotic hiatal hernia repair (RoboHH) in patients eligible for TIF. Methods A retrospective cohort study analyzed 76 patients with pH-confirmed GERD and hiatal hernias less than 2 cm. Preoperative assessments included manometry, pH study, esophagram, and endoscopy. Postoperative follow-up at 3 and 12 months included clinical assessment and esophagram. Statistical analysis compared demographic, preoperative, perioperative, and clinical outcomes, including symptomatic improvement, recurrence, and reintervention rates. Results 48 patients underwent TIF and 27 underwent RoboHH. Baseline patient characteristics and preoperative hiatal hernia sizes were comparable between TIF and RoboHH groups. Operative time was significantly shorter for TIF (67 vs. 128 minutes, p<0.001), and TIF was associated with a lower rate of postoperative admission (13% vs. 100%, p<0.001). At 3 months, symptomatic improvement was similar (80% TIF vs. 85% RoboHH, p=0.078). However, by 1 year, RoboHH demonstrated superior symptomatic improvement (89% vs. 38% for TIF, p=0.004), significantly lower symptom recurrence (0% vs. 44%, p<0.001), and lower reintervention rates (0% vs. 31%, p=0.005). Conclusion TIF offers perioperative advantages with shorter operative times and fewer hospital admissions compared to robotic hiatal hernia repair. However, these benefits are offset by higher rates of symptom recurrence and reintervention within one year. RoboHH provides superior long-term durability and sustained symptom control. These findings highlight the trade-offs between invasiveness and long-term efficacy, emphasizing the importance of patient selection and potential limitations of current TIF techniques, possibly due to factors like fat interposition affecting fundoplication integrity.
Reference Key
openalex_W7203904741 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Madison Harrison, Misho Hubka
Journal diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the international society for diseases of the esophagus
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/dote/doag077.067
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doag077.067
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.