Comparison of laparoscopic versus open repair of paraesophageal hernia

Philip R. Schauer, Sayeed Ikramuddin, Robert H. McLaughlin, Toby O. Graham, Adam Slivka, K. K.W. Lee, W. H. Schraut, J. D. Luketich

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

146 Scopus citations


BACKGROUND: Recent reports suggest that laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair (LPHR) is feasible, but no direct comparisons with the standard open paraesophageal hernia repair (OPHR) have been reported. The purpose of this study was to compare the short-term outcome of LPHR versus OPHR at a single institution. METHODS: The operative and postoperative courses of 95 consecutive patients undergoing open or laparoscopic repair of a paraesophageal hernia (PEH) were retrospectively reviewed, and outcomes of LPHR versus OPHR were compared. RESULTS: PEH was associated with advanced age and significant comorbidity. Although the operative time was increased for LPHR, there was a significant reduction in blood loss, intensive care unit stay, ileus, hospital stay, and overall morbidity associated with LPHR compared with OPHR. CONCLUSIONS: PEH is associated with significant comorbidity that increases the operative risk. Short-term outcomes for LPHR are superior to OPHR, suggesting that the laparoscopic approach is the preferred approach to paraesophageal hernia repair.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)659-665
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Surgery
Issue number6
StatePublished - Dec 1 1998

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of laparoscopic versus open repair of paraesophageal hernia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Schauer, P. R., Ikramuddin, S., McLaughlin, R. H., Graham, T. O., Slivka, A., Lee, K. K. W., Schraut, W. H., & Luketich, J. D. (1998). Comparison of laparoscopic versus open repair of paraesophageal hernia. American Journal of Surgery, 176(6), 659-665.