COMPARATIVE CHARACTERISTICS AND RESULTS OF SURGICAL TREATMENT IN PATIENTS WITH MEDIAN ARCUATE LIGAMENT SYNDROME IN COMBINATION WITH REFLUX ESOPHAGITIS

Relevance. Clarifying the sequence and mutual connection of the median arcuate ligamentum syndrome (MALS) and reflux esophagitis (RE) makes it possible to determine the indications and success of the operation. The objective of the study was to compare the results of the examination and operations in patients with the MALS in combination with RE. Material and methods. 198 patients with MALS were examined and operated. Among them, 85 patients was just with MALS, and decompression of celiac trunk was performed for them. 84 patients had MALS and RE, simultaneously decompression of celiac trunk and Nissen fundoplication were performed for that group of patients. 29 patients had MALS and RE, only decompression of celiac trunk was performed for that group. A comparative analysis of the results of examination and surgical treatment of 85 patients with the MALS and 84 in combination with RE was carried out. The average age of the patients is about 30 years, the female gender prevailed. The feeling of heaviness and abdominal pain due to eating and physical activity, neurovegetative disorders was almost in all patients. Daily or weekly heartburn, regurgitation, vomiting and dysphagia as well as edema, erythema and erosion of the esophageal mucosa were observed mainly in patients with MALS in combination with ER. Results. Significant compression stenosis of the celiac trunk was detected in all patients. After the decompression of the celiac trunk in patients with MALS as well as decompression of the celiac trunk and Nissen fundoplication in patients with MALS in combination with ER, most of them received good clinical results and normalization of anatomical and hemodynamic parameters in celiac trunk. Conclusion. In the combined version of the MALS and RE and the corresponding indications it is expedient to perform decompression of celiac trunk and Nissen fundoplication simultaneously.

1. Bjork M., Koelemay V., Acosta S. et al. ESVS Guidelines Disease of Mesenteric Arteries and Veins. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 2017;(53):460-510.

2. Ignashov A.M. Clinic, diagnosis and surgical treatment of stenosis of the celiac trunk. The author’s abstract of the dissertation of the doctor of medical sciences. 1988. (In Russ.).

3. Gervaziev V.B., Lubyansky V.G. Ciliary neuroischemic pain syndrome. Irkutsk. 1988 (In Russ.).

4. Bondarev V.I., Balliusek F.V., Kandaryan A.K. Extravasal compression of the celiac trunk: choice of the volume of adequate correction. Grudnaja I serdechno-sosudistaya hirurgija. 1993;(4):31-34 (In Russ.).

5. Ignashov A.M., Kanaev A.I., Kurkov A.A. et al. Compression stenosis of the celiac trunk in children and adolescents. Vestnik chirurgii. 2004;(5):78-81 (In Russ).

6. Ignashov A.M., Rybakov G.V., Kanaev A.I. et al. Gas-tro-esophageal reflux with esophagitis with compression stenosis of the celiac trunk. Abstracts of the “V Congress of the Scientific Society of Gastroenterologists of Russia and the XXXII Session of the Central Research Institute of Gastroenterology, Moscow, February 3-6, 2005”. Anaharsis. 2005:84-86 (In Russ.).

7. Loukas M., Pinyard J., Vaid S. et al. Clinical anatomy of celiac compression syndrome: a review. Clinical Anatomy. 2007;6(20): 612-617.

8. Loukas M., Wartmann Ch.T., Tubbs R. et al. Morphologic variation of the diaphragmatic crura a correlation with pathologic processes of the esophageal hiatus // Folia Morphol. (Warsz.). 2008;4(67):273 – 279.

9. Donahue P. E. Basic considerations in gastrоoesophageal reflux disease // Surg. Clin. N. Amеr. 1997;5(77):1017-1040.

10. Libero L., Varricchio A., Tartaglia A. et al. Laparoscopic treatment of celiac axis compression syndrome (CACS) and hiatal hernia: Case report with bleeding complications and review. Int. J. Surg. Case Rep. 2013; 10(4): 4:882-885.

11. Moneta G.L. Diagnosis of Intestinal Ischemia.Vascular Surgery. Fifth Edition. R.B. Rutherford W.B. Saunders Company. 2000;(2):1501-1512.

12. Savary M., Miller J. L,oesophage: Manual et atlas d,endoscopie, Soleure, Suisse, Verlag Gassaman. 1977.

13. Ware J.E. (Editor), SF-36 Health survey manual and interpretation guide. Boston: Nimrod Press. 1993.

14. Vasilevsky D.I., Kulagin V.I. Surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease / ed. S.F. Bagnenko. Moscow: SIMK. 2015 (In Russ.).

15. Mattioli S. Gastro-oesophageal Reflux Disease. ESTS Textbook of Thoracic Surgery / Editor Kuzdraf J. Medycyna Prakticzna Crakow. 2015;(2):499 – 521.

16. Kamolz T., Velanovich V. Psychological and emotional aspects gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dis. Esophagus. 2002;3(15):199-203.

17. Fuchs K.-H., Eypasch E. Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease – Update 2006. EAES Guidelines for Endoscopic Surgery: Twelve Years Evidence-Based Surgery in Europe / editors, Neugebauer E.A.M. et al. Springer. 2006:125- 142.

18. Chernousov F.F., Horobrykh T.V., Vetshev F.P.. et al. Quality of life of patients operated on for reflux-esophagitis and its complications. Hirurgija. 2017;12:217-227 (In Russ.).

19. Minushkin O.N., Maslovsky L.V. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (presentations, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment. 2014 (In Russ.).

20. Ignashov A.M., Deng Bo, Perlei V.E. et al. Comparative characteristics of transabdominal and intraoperative duplex scanning in assessing the results of decompression of the celiac trunk. Medicinskiy akademicheskiy zhurnal. 2012;4(12):15-21 (In Russ.).