BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic reoperative anti-reflux surgery (ARS) has a significantly higher morbidity than laparoscopic primary ARS; however, it is not known whether the same pattern exists within the robotic approach. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robotic reoperative ARS in comparison with primary robotic ARS.

METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing primary or reoperative robotic ARS at a tertiary referral center between 2012 and 2017 was performed. Perioperative outcomes and long-term symptom resolution were evaluated.

RESULTS: A total of 200 patients were included (38 reoperative and 162 primary ARS). Baseline characteristics were comparable across groups. Seven (18.4%) of the reoperative patients had two or more prior foregut operations. Patients in the reoperative group had a longer operative time (226 vs. 180 min, p < 0.001). There were no conversions to open technique, and one patient in the reoperative group (2.6%) had an intraoperative perforation. Twenty of the 38 reoperative patients (52.6%) were discharged within 24 h as compared to 109/162 primary patients (64.9%) (p = 0.09). The readmission rate and postoperative complication rates were 6 and 3%, respectively, and did not differ between groups. At a mean follow-up of 1 year, complete or partial resolution of preoperative symptoms was achieved in 97% of primary patients and 100% of reoperative patients (p = 0.4).

CONCLUSION: The robotic approach allows for minimal morbidity, short length of stay, and excellent functional outcomes in patients undergoing reoperative ARS when compared to patients undergoing primary ARS.