Laparoscopic surgery for esophageal achalasia: Multiport vs single‐incision approach

SILS can potentially improve aesthetic outcomes without adversely affecting treatment outcomes, but these outcomes are uncertain in laparoscopic H eller– D or surgery. We determined if the degree of patient satisfaction with aesthetic outcomes progressed with the equivalent treatment outcomes after the introduction of a single‐incision approach to laparoscopic H eller– D or surgery. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 20 consecutive esophageal achalasia patients (multiport approach, n  = 10; single‐incision approach, n  = 10) and assessed the treatment outcomes and patient satisfaction with the aesthetic outcomes. Results In the single‐incision approach, thin supportive devices were routinely used to gain exposure to the esophageal hiatus. No statistically significant differences in the operating time (210.2 ± 28.8 vs 223.5 ± 46.3 min; P  = 0.4503) or blood loss (14.0 ± 31.7 vs 16.0 ± 17.8 mL; P  = 0.8637) were detected between the multiport and single‐incision approaches. We experienced no intraoperative complications. Mild dysphagia, which resolved spontaneously, was noted postoperatively in one patient treated with the multiport approach. The reduction rate of the maximum lower esophageal sphincter pressure was 25.1 ± 34.4% for the multiport approach and 21.8 ± 19.2% for the single‐incision approach ( P  = 0.8266). Patient satisfaction with aesthetic outcomes was greater for the single‐incision approach than for the multiport approach. Conclusion When single‐incision laparoscopic H eller– D or surgery was performed adequately and combined with the use of thin supportive devices, patient satisfaction with the aesthetic outcomes was higher and treatment outcomes were equivalent to those of the multiport approach.