Comparing short-term patient outcomes after fundoplication performed over a traditional bougie versus a functional lumen imaging probe

Abstract

Background: The functional lumen imaging probe is a balloon-based catheter that can be used as a bougie during fundoplication. Our goal was to compare the short-term, quality-of-life outcomes and esophageal-injury rate after fundoplication over a functional lumen imaging probe compared to a traditional bougie.

Methods: This is a retrospective review of a quality database at a single center. Three-week and 6-month Reflux Symptom Index, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-health Related Quality of Life, and dysphagia scores were compared. The need for endoscopy and dilation between the groups was also compared.

Results: Between 2008 and 2020, 423 fundoplications were performed over a bougie and 62 over the functional lumen imaging probe. Six months after surgery, the functional lumen imaging probe group reported significantly worse dysphagia scores (1.5 ± 1.0 vs 1.1 ± 0.3, P = .007), but rates of endoscopy (4.8% vs 5.0%, P = .966) and dilation (4.8% vs 3.8%, P = .723) were similar. There were no differences between Reflux Symptom Index and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-health Related Quality of Life scores. The rate of bougie-related injuries was 2.1% vs 0% for the functional lumen imaging probe group.

Conclusion: Patients undergoing fundoplication over the functional lumen imaging probe had comparable short-term outcomes compared with those over a traditional bougie. The rate of esophageal injury while using the functional lumen imaging probe is lower than a bougie and may be preferable for fundoplication creation.