BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic cardiomyotomy is considered to be the treatment of choice for @entity1318 , there is no consensus about how persistent or recurrent @entity1282 after myotomy should be treated. In the current study we evaluated our experience with reoperation following previous cardiomyotomy. METHODS: Between 1992 and 2006, 19 @entity1 underwent re-myotomy: 7 for persistent @entity1282 , 12 for recurrent @entity1282 . Different operative approaches were used, depending on surgeon's preference and the technique used for the first operation. RESULTS: The mean interval between the cardiomyotomies was 81 months. In 12 @entity1 , the alternative body cavity to that used for the first operation was used for access in the revision operation. This was associated with a shorter operation time. Mean follow-up after the revision operation was 3.6 years. Mean satisfaction score was 7 (out of 10), and 89% of @entity1 had an improvement in symptoms. CONCLUSION: Reoperation for persistent or recurrent @entity1318 achieves a satisfactory outcome in most @entity1 . Using the alternative body cavity to that used in the original procedure facilitates minimal access techniques, and gives easier access to the operative field.

Reoperation for XXXX after cardiomyotomy for @entity1318 .

@entity1318 :: ('MESH:D004931', 'Disease') :: ['achalasia'] @entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients'] @entity1282 :: ('MESH:D003680', 'Disease') :: ['dysphagia']
@entity1282 :: (MESH:D003680,Disease) :: ['dysphagia']
