Use of mesh for hiatal hernia repair: a survey of SAGES members

Surgical strategies for recurrent hiatal hernia: three-point fundoplication fixation

BACKGROUND

The management of a recurrent (symptomatic) hiatal hernia remains controversial. This study aimed to review the outcomes of patients who underwent recurrent repair of hiatal hernias.

METHODS

Thirteen patients who underwent recurrent hiatal hernia repairs at our hospital between 2018 and 2024 were reviewed retrospectively. The postoperative outcomes and complications of these patients were investigated.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients were included in this study. The median time of reoperation from the previous hiatal hernia repair was 3 years (IQR, 2.5-5). Patients with a history of only one repair accounted for 76.9%, whereas those with two repairs accounted for 23.1%. All reoperations were completed laparoscopically. No deaths or readmissions during the 30-day postoperative period were recorded at an average of 30.5 ± 20.9 (6-68) months of follow-up. No other complications or symptoms were recorded, and oral medication was discontinued in eleven (84.6%) patients. The average GERD-Q score was 6.7 ± 1.3 postoperatively, whereas it was 10.4 ± 3.0 preoperatively.

CONCLUSION

We present several surgical strategies for addressing the recurrence of hiatal hernias. The key is not only to accurately close the hernia ring but also to fix the fundoplication to reduce the impact on the tissue around the hiatus to reduce the incidence of recurrence. Our three-point fixation technique showed promising effects in preventing recurrence but needs further study.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

ChiCTR2100049995.

PROsthetic MEsh Reinforcement in elective minimally invasive paraesophageal hernia repair (PROMER): an international survey

The optimal treatment for paraesophageal hiatus hernia (PEH) is controversial. While crural buttressing with mesh shows promises in reducing recurrences, the decision to use mesh during minimally invasive PEH repair is largely subjective. Due to these uncertainties, we conducted a survey to examine current clinical practices among surgeons and to assess which are the most important determinants in the decision-making process for mesh placement. Thirty-five multiple-choice Google Form-based survey on work-up, surgical techniques, and issues are considered in the decision-making process for mesh augmentation during minimally invasive PEH repair. Responses were graded on a 5-point Likert scale and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Consensus was defined as > 70% of participants agreed (agree or strongly agree) on a specific statement. Overall, 292 surgeons (86% from Europe) participated in the survey. The median age of participants was 42 years (range 29-69). The median number of PEH procedures was 25/year/center (range 5-400), with 67% of participants coming from high-volume centers (> 20 procedures/year). Consensus on use of mesh was reached for intraoperative findings of large (> 50% of intrathoracic stomach) PEH (74.3%), crural gap with > 4 cm distance between right and left crus (77.1%), and/or crural atrophy with < 0.5 cm thickness of one or both pillars (73%), and for redo surgery (71.9%). Further, consensus was reached in defining recurrence as a combination of refractory symptoms and anatomical/radiological evidence of > 2 cm hernia. This survey shows that large PEH, wide crural transverse diameter, fragile crura, and redo surgery are the most influential issues driving the decision for mesh-reinforced cruroplasty.

Cruroplasty with or without mesh? A systematic literature review with a novel time-organized proportion meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Improved outcomes with the use of non-absorbable mesh (NAM) for inguinal hernia repairs led to its rapid adoption for hiatal hernia (HH) repairs; however, feared complications occurred, and the trend shifted toward using absorbable mesh (AM). We aimed to analyze the literature assessing objective HH recurrence rates after primary laparoscopic cruroplasty with or without the use of different mesh types.

METHODS

A systematic literature review with both pairwise and time-organized proportion meta-analyses of articles published between January 1993 and September 2022 was performed using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Taylor & Francis databases to identify relevant studies comparing groups undergoing cruroplasty with suture repair (SR) alone, AM, NAM, or partially absorbable mesh (PAM). Studies documenting an objective follow-up ≥ 6 months were included. The primary outcome was the HH recurrence rate confirmed by barium esophagram or upper GI endoscopy.

RESULTS

A total of 34 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 6 randomized clinical trials, 25 retrospectives studies, and 3 prospective cohort studies. A total of 2170 subjects underwent laparoscopic HH repair and completed an objective follow-up ≥ 6 months after surgery; the objective recurrence rate was 20.8% (99/477) at a mean follow-up of 25.8 ± 16.4 months for the SR group, 20.6% (244/1187) at 28.1 ± 13.8 months for the AM group, 13.7% (65/475) at 30.8 ± 15.3 months for the NAM group, and 0% (0/31) at 32.5 ± 13.5 months for the PAM group. However, the pairwise meta-analysis revealed that overall mesh use was not superior to SR in preventing long-term HH recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The use of AM does not appear to reduce HH recurrence compared to SR alone. Although the data favors NAM to decrease objective HH recurrence in the mid-term, the long-term (≥ 48 months) recurrence rate was similar with or without any type of mesh.

Hiatal hernia repair with biosynthetic mesh reinforcement: a qualitative systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Reinforcement of crural closure with synthetic resorbable mesh has been proposed to decrease recurrence rates after hiatal hernia repair, but continues to be controversial. This systematic review aims to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and intermediate-term results of using biosynthetic mesh to augment the hiatus.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed throughout this systematic review. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions and Risk of Bias in Randomized Trials tools were used to perform qualitative assessment of all studies included in this review. Recommendations were then summarized for the following pre-defined key items: protocol, research question, search strategy, study eligibility, data extraction, study design, risk of bias, publication bias, and statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The systematic literature search found 520 articles, 101 of which were duplicates and 355 articles were determined to be unrelated to our study and excluded. The full text of the remaining 64 articles was thoroughly assessed. A total of 18 articles (1846 patients) were ultimately included for this review, describing hiatal hernia repair using three different biosynthetic meshes-BIO-A, Phasix ST, and polyglactin mesh. Mean operative time varied from 127 to 223 min. Mean follow up varied from 12 to 54 months. There were no mesh erosions or explants. One mesh-related complication of stenosis requiring reoperation was reported with BIO-A. Studies showed significant improvement in symptom and quality-of-life scores, as well as satisfaction with surgery. Recurrence was reported as radiologic or clinical recurrence. Overall, recurrence rate varied from 0.9 to 25%.

CONCLUSION

The use of biosynthetic mesh is safe and effective for hiatal hernia repair with low complications rates and high symptom resolution. The reported recurrence rates are highly variable due to significant heterogeneity in defining and evaluating recurrences. Further randomized controlled trials with larger samples and long-term follow-up should be performed to better analyze outcomes and recurrence rates.

Pre-existing hiatal mesh increases morbidity during and after revisional antireflux surgery: A retrospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Revisional antireflux surgery, including hiatus hernia repair, is increasingly common. Mesh-augmented hiatal closure at the time of index operation is controversial but commonly performed. Although a meta-analysis of randomized data has demonstrated no additional benefit of routine mesh placement, it is unclear whether this practice results in harm, particularly at the time of revisional antireflux surgery. We determined whether pre-existing mesh at the hiatus increases morbidity during and after revisional antireflux surgery.

METHODS

Analysis of prospectively-maintained databases of all elective revisional antireflux surgery cases in 36 hospitals across Australia took place over 10 years. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of patients with and without prior hiatal mesh were compared. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to validate primary findings.

RESULTS

A total of 346 revisional cases (35 with pre-existing mesh) were analyzed. The 2 groups had comparable baseline characteristics. In total, 77 (22.2%) patients had 148 intraoperative adverse events. Pre-existing mesh was associated with a higher risk of intraoperative complications (48.6% vs 22.5%, odds ratio 3.25, 95% confidence interval 1.63-6.38, P = .002), secondary to bleeding, and lacerations to pleura, lung, and liver. Overall, 63 (18.2%) patients developed postoperative complications. Pre-existing mesh was associated with increased postoperative morbidity (37.1% vs 16.1%, odds ratio 3.09, 95% confidence interval 1.50-6.43, P = .005), particularly due to bleeding and respiratory complications. Importantly, pre-existing mesh independently predicted the occurrence of intraoperative and postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Prior hiatal mesh significantly increases morbidity during and after revisional antireflux surgery. Given that revisional surgery is increasingly being performed, our findings discourage routine mesh use during primary antireflux surgery.

Management of paraesophageal hiatus hernia: recommendations following a European expert Delphi consensus

AIMS

There is considerable controversy regarding optimal management of patients with paraesophageal hiatus hernia (pHH). This survey aims at identifying recommended strategies for work-up, surgical therapy, and postoperative follow-up using Delphi methodology.

METHODS

We conducted a 2-round, 33-question, web-based Delphi survey on perioperative management (preoperative work-up, surgical procedure and follow-up) of non-revisional, elective pHH among European surgeons with expertise in upper-GI. Responses were graded on a 5-point Likert scale and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Items from the questionnaire were defined as "recommended" or "discouraged" if positive or negative concordance among participants was > 75%. Items with lower concordance levels were labelled "acceptable" (neither recommended nor discouraged).

RESULTS

Seventy-two surgeons with a median (IQR) experience of 23 (14-30) years from 17 European countries participated (response rate 60%). The annual median (IQR) individual and institutional caseload was 25 (15-36) and 40 (28-60) pHH-surgeries, respectively. After Delphi round 2, "recommended" strategies were defined for preoperative work-up (endoscopy), indication for surgery (typical symptoms and/or chronic anemia), surgical dissection (hernia sac dissection and resection, preservation of the vagal nerves, crural fascia and pleura, resection of retrocardial lipoma) and reconstruction (posterior crurorrhaphy with single stitches, lower esophageal sphincter augmentation (Nissen or Toupet), and postoperative follow-up (contrast radiography). In addition, we identified "discouraged" strategies for preoperative work-up (endosonography), and surgical reconstruction (crurorrhaphy with running sutures, tension-free hiatus repair with mesh only). In contrast, many items from the questionnaire including most details of mesh augmentation (indication, material, shape, placement, and fixation technique) were "acceptable".

CONCLUSIONS

This multinational European Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process to identify recommended strategies for the management of pHH. Our work may be useful in clinical practice to guide the diagnostic process, increase procedural consistency and standardization, and to foster collaborative research.

Does bioabsorbable mesh reduce hiatal hernia recurrence rates? A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The use of bioabsorbable mesh at the hiatus is controversial. Long-term data are scant. We evaluated the world literature and performed a meta-analysis to determine if these meshes were effective in reducing recurrence.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, and ClinicalKey. We evaluated articles reporting on both Bio-A™ (polyglycolic acid:trimethylene carbonate-PGA:TMC) and Phasix™ (poly-4-hydroxybutyrate-P4HB) used at the hiatus. The DerSimonian-Laird random effects model was used to estimate the overall pooled treatment effect along with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Similar analysis was conducted to compare the clinical outcomes, i.e., recurrence rate, mean surgical time, mean hospital stays and mean follow-up duration between non-Mesh and Mesh group. The I2 statistic was computed to assess the heterogeneity in effect sizes across the studies.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies (12 mesh studies with 963 subjects and 9 non-mesh studies with 617 subjects) were included to conduct the meta-analysis. There was one article reporting outcomes on P4HB mesh (73 subjects) and 11 on PGA:TMC mesh (890 subjects). The bioabsorbable mesh group had a significantly lower recurrence rate compared to the non-mesh group (8% vs. 18%; 95%CI 0.08-0.17), pooled p-value < 0.0001. Surgery time was shorter in the mesh group compared to the non-mesh group (136.4 min vs. 150 min) but not statistically significant (p = 0.54). There tended to be a more extended follow-up period after surgery in the non-mesh group compared to the mesh group (27 vs. 25.8 months, range 10.8-54 months); but not statistically significant (ES: 27.4; 95%CI 21.6-33.3; p = 0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Hiatal hernia repair with bioabsorbable mesh is more effective at reducing hernia recurrence rate in the mid-term than simple suture cruroplasty. Further studies investigating the long-term outcomes and P4HB mesh are needed.

Complications, caused by application of the net implants in the hiatal hernias plasty

Objective. Studying of complications, connected with application of the net implants in patients with large hiatal hernias. Materials and methods. Retrospective investigation was conducted with objective to study complications, connected with application of the net implants in patients with large hiatal hernias, operated in the clinic during period from 2008 to 2018 yr. Of 1168 patients operated on and suffering gastro-esophageal reflux disease as well as hiatal hernias, 817 have had large hernias. In 353 patients with large hernias for strengthening of cruroraphy sutures the net implants were applied. There were used low-weighted implant-net Ultrapro, the composite net Parietex, self-fixating surgical net ProGrip, absorbable net Vicryl, polytetrafluoroethylene net with nitinol carcass, biological net Bio-A. All the patients symptoms were registered, and the quality of life studied. Results. Complications, caused by the net implants impact, were revealed in 17 (1.5%) patients. In all 17 patients the esophageal structuring have occurred due to pronounced cicatrization in region of the net implant installation. In 6 patients dysphagia due to the net ingrowth into esophageal tissue was observed, and in 2 – chronic inflammatory process in place of the net installation. One patient have had small esophageal perforation with restricted mediastinitis. In 3 patients, in whom the polytetrafluoroethylene nets were installed, their migration into esophageal lumen was revealed. Reoperations were done in all 17 patients. In 7 patients the net was removed completely. In 1 patient the net was removed and mediastinum drained. In 3 patients, in whom polytetrafluoroethylene nets have migrated into esophageal lumen, they were removed endoscopically with further installation of special stents. Results of reoperations were estimated as good in 15 patients. In 2 patients after reoperations dysphagia was observed, which needed a second time balloon dilatation and installation of stent in 1 of them. Conclusion. Nonabsorbable nets ought to be applied with high technical accuracy, it is necessary to prevent their contact with the esophagus. Application of the polytetrafluoroethylene nets with nitinol carcass for plasty of large hiatal hernias must be forbidden.

Esophagectomy for Permanent Mesh Migration after Transthoracic Hiatal Hernia Repair

A 76-year-old woman with distant history of right diaphragmatic hernia repair with permanent mesh and subsequent laparotomy for mesh migration re-presents with pneumonia. On initial presentation, esophagogastroduodenoscopy and computed tomography noted a contained esophageal perforation with residual permanent mesh. Although the patient initially deferred esophagectomy, a right lower lobe lung abscess developed necessitating mesh resection and an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. We present the first case of mesh migration and erosion through esophagus and the right lower lobe of the lung. Permanent mesh should not be used during hiatal hernia repairs due to complications such as mesh erosion.

Anatomic location and mechanism of hiatal hernia recurrence: a video-based assessment

INTRODUCTION

Hiatal hernia recurrence following surgical repair is common. We sought to define the most common anatomic location and mechanism for hiatal failure to inform technical strategies to decrease recurrence rates.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review and video analysis were performed for all recurrent hiatal hernia operations performed by a single surgeon between January 2013 and April 2020. Hiatal recurrences were defined by anatomic quadrants. Recurrences on both left and right on either the anterior or posterior portion of the hiatus were simply classified as 'anterior' or 'posterior', respectively. Three or more quadrants were defined as circumferential. Mechanism of recurrence was defined as disruption of the previous repair or dilation of the hiatus.

RESULTS

There were 130 patients to meet criteria. Median time to reoperation from previous hiatal repair was 60 months (IQR19.5-132). First-time recurrent repairs accounted for 74%, second time 18%, and three or more previous repairs for 8% of analyzed procedures. Mesh had been placed at the hiatus in a previous operation in 16%. All reoperative cases were completed laparoscopically. Video analysis revealed anterior recurrences were most common (67%), followed by circumferential (29%). There were two with left-anterior recurrence (1.5%), two posterior recurrence (1.5%), and one right-sided recurrence. The mechanism of recurrence was dilation in 74% and disruption in 26%. Disruption as a mechanism was most common in circumferential hiatal failures. Neither the prior number of hiatal surgeries nor the presence of mesh at the time of reoperation correlated with anatomic recurrence location or mechanism. Reoperations in patients with hiatal disruption occurred after a shorter interval when compared to hiatal dilation.

CONCLUSION

The most common location and mechanism for hiatal hernia recurrence is anterior dilation of the hiatus. Outcomes following techniques designed to reinforce the anterior hiatus and perhaps to prevent hiatal dilation should be explored.

Treatment strategy for laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair

INTRODUCTION

According to the anatomy-function-pathology classification, the recurrence rates of A2 and A3 hiatal hernia (HH) after laparoscopic fundoplication are higher than the rate of A1 HH. Therefore, we introduced mesh reinforcement for A2 and A3 cases. In addition, gastropexy was added to A3 cases. We present the strategy for HH repair.

METHODS

In all, 537 patients (mean age 55.4 ± 16.7 years, 219 women) who underwent primary laparoscopic fundoplication for HH from January 1995 to October 2019 were included. They were divided into three groups by A factor (A1:A2:A3 = 296:156:85). Their clinical data were collected in a prospective fashion and retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

The median age (years) of the patients in each group was A1:A2:A3 = 46:63:74 years, and age was directly proportional to the size of HH (P < 0.0001). The proportion of females was significantly higher in A3 than in other classes (P < 0.0001). Preoperative reflux esophagitis was severe in A2 (P < 0.0001) and operation time (min) was directly proportional to HH size (A1:A2:A3 = 135:167:193, P < 0.0001). The recurrence rate of conventional laparoscopic fundoplication was 15% (46/304), and it was higher for A2 and A3 than for A1 (P = 0.027). However, with reinforcement of the hiatus using a mesh and gastropexy, the recurrence rates decreased.

CONCLUSION

Combining mesh reinforcement and gastropexy may reduce the recurrence rate of para- and mixed-type HH.

Repair of Large Hiatal Hernias With the Use of Mesh and Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma

BACKGROUND

According to recent studies, large hiatal hernias (HH) can be associated with a lower content of type-I and type-III collagen in the phrenoesophageal ligament (POL). We therefore hypothesize that the use of a mesh implant with autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for repair of large HH would have a positive effect on long-term outcome.The purpose of our study was to determine the level of type-I and type-III collagens in the POL of patients with large HH with the aim of improving the technique of HH repair.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During the first phase of the study, the collagen content within the POL was assessed in 18 patients with HH and 14 cadaveric specimens without HH. During the second phase, 54 patients with large HH (defined as 10 to 20 cm2), that required surgery were recruited. Laparoscopic repair involved use of a nonabsorbable self-fixating ProGrip mesh infiltrated with 2 to 4 mL of autologous PRP was used for reinforcement of crural repair. Results were assessed using endoscopy, barium swallow, 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring and a quality of life gastroesophageal reflux disease-health related quality of life questionnaire.

RESULTS

The content of collagen within POL in patients with HH was significantly lower than in the cadaveric specimens without HH. Of the 54 patients undergoing HH repair, all procedures were performed laparoscopically and there were no mortalities in this group. At 48 months, only 2 HH recurrences (3.7%) were detected. During this period, the mean gastroesophageal reflux disease-health related quality of life score decreased from 15.7±5.5 to 5.9±0.6 (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our study has shown that the collagen content is reduced in patients with large HH; thus, it is advisable to use mesh for HH repair in such patients. Use of mesh infiltrated in PRP is safe and can have positive impact on results of HH repair.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Redo Fundoplication in Patients With Failed Antireflux Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize the current available evidence regarding the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic redo fundoplication (LRF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although antireflux surgery is highly effective, a minority of patients will require a LRF due to recurrent symptoms, mechanical failure, or intolerable side-effects of the primary repair.

METHODS

A systematic electronic search on LRF was conducted in the Medline database and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Conversion and postoperative morbidity were used as primary endpoints to determine feasibility and safety. Symptom improvement, QoL improvement, and recurrence rates were used as secondary endpoints to assess efficacy. Heterogeneity across studies was tested with the Chi-square and the proportion of total variation attributable to heterogeneity was estimated by the inconsistency (I2) statistic. A random-effect model was used to generate a pooled proportion with 95% confidence interval (CI) across all studies.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies and 2,095 LRF were included. The mean age at reoperation was 53.3 years. The weighted pooled proportion of conversion was 6.02% (95% CI, 4.16%-8.91%) and the meta-analytic prevalence of major morbidity was 4.98% (95% CI, 3.31%-6.95%). The mean follow-up period was 25 (6-58) months. The weighted pooled proportion of symptom and QoL improvement was 78.50% (95% CI, 74.71%-82.03%) and 80.65% (95% CI, 75.80%-85.08%), respectively. The meta-analytic prevalence estimate of recurrence across the studies was 10.71% (95% CI, 7.74%-14.10%).

CONCLUSIONS

LRF is a feasible and safe procedure that provides symptom relief and improved QoL to the vast majority of patients. Although heterogeneously assessed, recurrence rates seem to be low. LRF should be considered a valuable treatment modality for patients with failed antireflux surgery.

Mesh-related complications in paraoesophageal repair: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Paraoesophageal hernias (PEH) have a high recurrence rate, prompting surgeons to consider the use of mesh reinforcement of the hiatus. The risks and benefits of mesh augmentation in PEH repair are debated. Mesh-related complications including migration and erosion are considered in this publication.

DESIGN

A systematic literature review of articles published between 1970 and 2019 in Medline, OVID, Embase, and Springer database was conducted, identifying case reports, case series and observational studies of PEH repair reporting mesh-related complications.

RESULTS

Thirty-five case reports/series of 74 patients and 20 observational studies reporting 75 of 4200 patients with mesh complications have been included. The incidence of mesh-related erosions in this study is 0.035%. PTFE, ePTFE, composite and synthetic meshes were frequently associated with mesh erosion requiring intervention. Complete erosions are often managed endoscopically while partial erosions may require surgery and resection of the oesophagus and/or stomach.

CONCLUSIONS

Mesh-related complication is rare with dysphagia a common presenting feature. Mesh erosion is associated with synthetic mesh more frequently in the reported literature. A mesh registry with long-term longitudinal data would help in understanding the true incidence of mesh-related complications.

A Collective Review of Gore Bio-A Absorbable Synthetic Mesh in Cruroplasty Reinforcement

Background: Laparoscopic repair of hiatal hernia (HH) is associated with a considerable failure rate. Compared to suture repair alone, mesh-reinforced cruroplasty may be associated with fewer short-term recurrences, yet its use remains controversial. The aim of this study was to analyze the current literature assessing the use of Bio-A absorbable synthetic mesh in the reinforcement of primary crural closure after laparoscopic HH repair. Methods: A systematic review of primary literature in the MEDLINE and PubMed databases was conducted. We searched for investigations reporting patient outcomes in laparoscopic HH repair with onlay Gore Bio-A tissue reinforcement (W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc.) published between January 2008 and December 2019. The primary outcome was anatomical recurrence rate. Secondary outcomes were complication rate, symptomatic outcomes, and mortality. Results: Eight studies met inclusion criteria. There were two prospective and six retrospective cohort studies. In the included studies, laparoscopic HH repair was performed with Bio-A absorbable synthetic mesh in 734 patients. The anatomical recurrence data were extracted across all studies, and an objective recurrence was identified in 21/280 (7.5%) patients. There was only 1 (0.17%) mesh-related complication in the included studies. Conclusions: The use of Bio-A absorbable synthetic mesh in the repair of HHs may be promising, as it offers low rates of anatomical recurrence and mesh-related complications, but more data are still necessary to validate these findings. This collective review of literature is a basis for future randomized controlled trials to identify the most effective and safe mesh in the long term.

Massive hiatal hernia involving prolapse of the entire stomach and pancreas resulting in pancreatitis and bile duct dilatation: a case report

Background

Hiatal hernia is defined by the permanent or intermittent prolapse of any abdominal structure into the chest through the diaphragmatic esophageal hiatus. Prolapse of the stomach, intestine, transverse colon, and spleen is relatively common, but herniation of the pancreas is a rare condition. We describe a case of acute pancreatitis and bile duct dilatation secondary to a massive hiatal hernia of pancreatic body and tail.

Case presentation

An 86-year-old woman with hiatal hernia who complained of epigastric pain and vomiting was admitted to our hospital. Blood tests revealed a hyperamylasemia and abnormal liver function test. Computed tomography revealed prolapse of the massive hiatal hernia, containing the stomach and pancreatic body and tail, with peripancreatic fluid in the posterior mediastinal space as a sequel to pancreatitis. In addition, intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile ducts were seen to be dilated and deformed. After conservative treatment for pancreatitis, an elective operation was performed. There was a strong adhesion between the hernial sac and the right diaphragmatic crus. After the stomach and pancreas were pulled into the abdominal cavity, the hiatal orifice was closed by silk thread sutures (primary repair), and the mesh was fixed in front of the hernial orifice. Toupet fundoplication and intraoperative endoscopy were performed. The patient had an uneventful postoperative course post-procedure.

Conclusion

A rare massive hiatal hernia, involving the stomach and pancreatic body and tail, can cause acute pancreatitis with bile duct dilatation. The etiology can be flexure of the main pancreatic and extrahepatic bile ducts. Symptomatic herniation is best treated with surgery. Elective surgery is thought to be safer than emergent surgery in patients with serious complications.

Paraesophageal Hernia: To Mesh or Not to Mesh? The Controversy Continues

Introduction: Paraesophageal hernias represent 5%-10% of all primary hiatal hernias and are becoming increasingly more common with the aging of the population. Surgical treatment includes closure of the wide hiatal gap. Achieving tension-free closure is difficult, and several studies have reported lower recurrence rates with the use of mesh reinforcement. The use of this technique, however, is controversial. Objective and Materials and Methods: Narrative revision of the literature revising: (1) evidence-based surgery and clinical studies, (2) what the experts say (Delphi), (3) complications of mesh, and (4) long-term results of laparoscopic treatment impact on the quality of life. Results: Consensus about the type of mesh continues to be elusive, and we clearly need a higher level of evidence to address the controversy. Conclusion: Mesh reinforcement can effectively reduce the hernia recurrence rate. Mesh-associated complications are few, but because they are serious, most experts recommend mesh use only in specific circumstances, particularly those in relation to the size of the hiatal defect and the quality of the crura.

Use of absorbable meshes in laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair

Paraesophageal hernia (PEH) repair is one of the most challenging upper gastrointestinal operations. Its high rate of recurrence is due mostly to the low quality of the crura and size of the hiatal defect. In an attempt to diminish the recurrence rates, some clinical investigators have begun performing mesh-reinforced cruroplasty with nonabsorbable meshes like polypropylene or polytetrafluoroethylene. The main problem with these materials is the occurrence, in some patients, of serious mesh-related morbidities, such as erosions into the stomach and the esophagus, some of which necessitate subsequent esophagectomy or gastrectomy. Absorbable meshes can be synthetic or biological and were introduced in recent years for PEH repair with the intent of diminishing the recurrence rates observed after primary repair alone but, theoretically, without the risks of morbidities presented by the nonabsorbable meshes. The current role of absorbable meshes in PEH repair is still under debate, since there are few data regarding their long-term efficacy, particularly in terms of recurrence rates, morbidity, need for revision, and quality of life. In this opinion review, we analyze all the presently available evidence of reinforced cruroplasty for PEH repair using nonabsorbable meshes (synthetic or biological), focusing particularly on recurrence rates, mesh-related morbidity, and long-term quality of life.

Mesh reinforcement of paraesophageal hernia repair: Trends and outcomes from a national database

BACKGROUND

Placement of paraesophageal type of "mesh" in paraesophageal hernia repair is controversial. This study examines the trends and outcomes of mesh placement in paraesophageal hernia repair.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried for patients who underwent paraesophageal hernia repair with or without mesh (2010-2017). Demographics, operative approach, and outcomes were compared over time.

RESULTS

Of 25,801, most paraesophageal hernia repair cases were elective (89.3%), without mesh (61.9%), and performed laparoscopically (91.3%).When compared with open paraesophageal hernia repair patients, the patients undergoing laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair had lesser rates of reoperation, readmission, mortality, overall complications and major complications (2.7% vs 4.8%, 6.2% vs 9.6%, 0.6% vs 2.9%, 7.1% vs 21.3%, 3.8% vs 11.1%, respectively; all P < .0001). Mesh placement was more common in laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair (38.9 vs 29.7, P < .0001) than opern paraesophageal hernia repair. During 2010-2017, mesh placement decreased from 46.2% to 35.2% of laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair (P < .0001). Operative times for laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair decreased over time, and laparoscpic paraesophageal hernia repair without mesh was consistently less (with mesh: 176.0 ± 71.0 to 149.9 ± 72.5 min, without mesh: 148.6 ± 71.4 to 134.6 ± 70.4). We observed no changes in comorbidities or adverse outcomes over time. Using multivariate analysis to control for potential confounding factors, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was associated most strongly with adverse outcomes, including mortality (OR 2.53, CI 1.55-4.14), any complications (OR 1.80, CI 1.51-2.16), major complications (OR 1.80, CI 1.51-2.16), readmission (OR 1.63, CI 1.33-1.99) and reoperation (OR 1.49, CI 1.10-2.02). Mesh placement was not associated with adverse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The placement of mesh during laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair is not associated with adverse outcomes. Use of mesh with laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair is decreasing with no apparent adverse impact on short-term patient outcomes. Further research is needed to investigate patient factors not captured by this national database, such as characteristics of the hernia, patient symptoms, and hernia recurrence.

[Hiatus hernia : Standards and controversies in diagnostics and treatment]

A hiatus hernia is defined as a transdiaphragmatic protrusion/migration of the intrabdominal contents through the esophageal hiatus of the diaphragm. The classification of hiatus hernias is based on anatomical morphological differentiation (types I-IV). The leading symptoms and psychological stress vary with respect to the symptoms, e. g. reflux and compression symptoms. Gastroscopy and multichannel intraluminal impedance pH measurement are obligatory preoperative functional diagnostics. A distinction is made between frequent type I hernia (antireflux surgery), symptomatic paraesophageal, thoracic and mixed hernia types (II-IV). Surgical indications exist in symptomatic type II-IV hernias. Hiatal mesh augmentation reduces recurrences. The complication potential of synthetic meshes must be taken into account. Biological implants show no advantages.

Laparoscopic repair of type III/IV giant para-oesophageal herniae with biological prosthesis: a single centre experience

PURPOSE

Repair of giant paraoesophageal herniae (GPEH) is technically challenging and requires significant experience in advanced foregut surgery. Controversy continues on suture versus mesh cruroplasty with the most recent systematic review and meta-analysis putting the onus on the operating surgeon. Study aim was to review whether the biological prosthesis (non-cross-linked bovine pericardium and porcine dermis) and the technique adopted for patients with GPEH had an influence on clinical and radiological recurrences.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected data of 60 consecutive patients with confirmed 5 cm hiatus hernia and ≥ 30% stomach displacement in the thorax that were operated in the upper gastrointestinal unit of a large district general hospital between September 2010 and August 2017. Pre and post-surgery Gastro-Oesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire [(GORD-HRQOL)] and a follow up contrast study were completed.

RESULTS

60 included 2 (3%) and 58 (97%) emergency and elective procedures respectively with a male: female ratio of 1:3, age 71* (Median) (42-89) years, BMI 29* (19-42) and 26 (43%) with ASA III/IV. Investigations confirmed 46* (37-88) mm and 42* (34-77) mm transverse and antero-posterior hiatal defect respectively with 60* (30-100)% displacement of stomach into chest. Operative time and length of stay was 180* (120-510) minutes and 2* (1-30) days respectively. One (2%) converted for bleeding and 2 (3%) peri-operative deaths. Five (8%), 5 (8%) and 4 (7%) have dysphagia, symptomatic and radiological recurrences respectively. GORD-HRQOL recorded preoperatively was 27* (10-39) dropping significantly postoperatively to 0* (0-21) (P < 0.005) with 95% patient satisfaction at a follow up of 60* (36-84) months.

CONCLUSIONS

Our technique of laparoscopic GPEH repair with biological prosthesis is safe with a reduced symptomatic and radiological recurrence and an acceptable morbidity and mortality.

Biologic Keyhole Mesh in Hiatal Hernia Repair

Background and Objectives

Laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair (LPEHR) is the new standard, but the use of mesh is still debated. Biologic mesh has shown great promise, but only the U-shaped onlay has been extensively studied. Postoperative dysphagia has historically been a concern with the use of synthetic keyhole mesh and subsequently slowed its adoption. The purpose of our study was to identify the incidence of postoperative dysphagia in a series of patients who underwent laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair with novel placement of keyhole biologic mesh.

Methods

Thirty consecutive patients who underwent hernia repair with primary suture cruroplasty and human acellular dermal matrix keyhole mesh reinforcement were reviewed over a 2-year period. All procedures were performed at a single institution. Postoperative symptoms were retrospectively identified. Any postoperative hernia on imaging was defined as radiographic recurrence.

Results

Of the 30 consecutive patients who underwent hernia repair, 3 (10%) had mild preoperative dysphagia. The number remained unchanged after LPEHR with keyhole mesh. Return of mild reflux symptoms occurred in 6 (20%) patients. Repeat imaging was performed in 11 patients (37%) at an average of 8 months with 2 slight recurrences. All hernias were classified on preoperative imaging as large hiatal hernias. There were no postoperative complications.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair with biologic keyhole mesh reinforcement has a low recurrence rate and no increase in postoperative dysphagia. The traditional belief that keyhole mesh has a higher incidence of dysphagia was not evident in this series.

Impact of Operative Times and Mesh Utilization on Paraesophageal Hernia Repair: Analysis of 30-Day Outcomes from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Database

BACKGROUND

Using mesh to buttress the crural repair following a paraesophageal hernia repair remains controversial. This article evaluates recent trends in laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repairs and analyzes the impact of mesh and operative time on postoperative morbidity.

METHODS

The 2013-2015 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried for elective laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair with and without mesh. Operative times were grouped into quartiles and statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance univariate with post hoc testing and multivariate regression modeling. The outcomes of interest were composite morbidity scores and readmission rates within 30 days of surgery.

RESULTS

The database identified a cohort of 6234 laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repairs. Mesh was utilized in 42% of cases per year and did not change over the study period (P = .367). Mesh was used 37%, 40%, 43%, and 49% of the time within operative quartiles 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively (P < .001). Postoperative morbidity and readmission rates for each operative time quartile were 2.8%, 4.1%, 5.42%, and 6.13% (P < .001) and 4.4%, 5%, 6.2%, and 7.6% (P = .001), respectively. Post hoc testing indicated statistically significant differences in postoperative morbidity and readmission rates between quartiles 1 and 3/4. Multivariate regression analysis documented operative time as a risk factor for postoperative morbidities and readmission. Simply using mesh was not directly associated with postoperative morbidity.

CONCLUSION

Mesh utilization does not impact postoperative outcomes; however, as operative time increases, the incidence of postoperative morbidity also increases.

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic large hiatus hernia repair with nonabsorbable mesh

The use of mesh to augment suture repair of large hiatus hernias remains controversial. Repair with mesh may help reduce the recurrence rate of primary repair, but concerns about the potential for serious complications, such as mesh erosion or stricturing, continue to limit its use. We aim to evaluate the long-term outcome of primary hiatus hernia repair with lightweight polypropylene mesh (TiMesh) specifically looking at rates of clinical recurrence, dysphagia, and mesh-related complications. From a prospectively maintained database, 50 consecutive patients who underwent elective primary laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair with TiMesh between January 2005 and December 2007 were identified. Case notes and postoperative endoscopy reports were reviewed. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using a structured questionnaire, including a validated dysphagia score. Of the 50 patients identified, 36 (72%) were contactable for follow-up. At a median follow-up of 9 years, the majority of patients (97%) regarded their surgery as successful. Twelve patients (33%) reported a recurrence of their symptoms, but only 4 (11%) reported that their symptoms were as severe as prior to the surgery. There was no significant difference between pre- and postoperative dysphagia scores. Postoperative endoscopy reports were available for 32 patients at a median time point of 4 years postoperatively, none of which revealed any mesh-related complications. One patient had undergone a revision procedure for a recurrent hernia at another institution. In this series, primary repair of large hiatus hernia with nonabsorbable mesh was not associated with any adverse effects over time. Patient satisfaction with symptomatic outcome remained high in the long term.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic mesh versus suture repair of hiatus hernia: objective and subjective outcomes

BACKGROUND

Hiatus hernia (HH) contributes to the pathophysiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Mesh-augmentation of surgical repair might be associated with a reduced risk of recurrence and GERD. However, recurrence rates, mesh-associated complications and quality of life (QOL) after mesh versus suture repair are debated. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine HH recurrence following mesh-augmentation versus suture repair. Secondary aims were to compare complications, mortality, QOL and GERD symptoms following different repair techniques.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of the PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Springer database was performed to identify relevant studies comparing mesh-augmentation versus suture repair of the esophageal hiatus. Data pertinent to the benefit versus risk outcomes for these techniques were extracted and compared by meta-analysis. The odd ratio (OR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (4 randomized, 9 non-randomized) comparing mesh (n = 719) versus suture (n = 755) repair were identified. Mesh-augmentation was associated with a reduced overall recurrence rate compared to suture repair [2.6 vs. 9.4%, OR 0.23 (95% CI 0.14-0.39), P < 0.00001]. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications (P = 0.400) between groups. Improvement in QOL measured by SF-36 was greater following biological mesh-augmentation compared to suture repair (MD = 13.68, 95% CI 2.51-24.85, P = 0.020), as well as GERD-HRQL. No differences were seen for the GIQLI scores with permanent mesh (P = 0.530). Dysphagia improvements were better following suture repair (MD = 1.47, 95% CI 0.20-2.74, P = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

Mesh repair of HH conferred some advantages and disadvantages at short-term follow-up. Compared to a suture repair alone, mesh-augmentation might be associated with less short-term recurrences, and biological mesh was associated with improved short-term QOL. However, these advantages were offset by more dysphagia. Long-term outcomes are still needed to determine the place of mesh repair of HH.

Mesh hiatal reinforcement in laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for neurologically impaired children is safe and feasible

Fundoplication is a standard treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in neurologically impaired children. However, it has a high recurrence rate due to wrap herniation and disruption resulting from the failure or enlargement of the esophageal hiatus suture site. In adult patients with GERD, reinforcement of the sutured esophageal hiatus with a mesh significantly reduces the recurrence rate after surgery for esophageal hiatus hernia. In children, there are no big series of fundoplication with mesh reinforcement. Therefore, we confirmed the safety and feasibility of an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene mesh hiatal reinforcement with fundoplication as an additional procedure for neurologically impaired children. Neurologically impaired children (age, ≥5 years) who underwent laparoscopic fundoplication and gastrostomy at our institution between 2011 and 2013 were included in this study. The operative time, bleeding amount, complications, and recurrence were retrospectively evaluated. Thirteen patients were included in this study. The mean age at operation was 147.2 ± 37.8 months, and mean body weight was 18.5 ± 7.9 kg. The complication rate of epilepsy and scoliosis was 100% and 84.6%, respectively. The operative time was 265.1 ± 38.1 minutes, and mean blood loss was 26.5 ± 34.7 mL. There were no peri- or postoperative complications. None of the patients showed recurrent symptoms such as repeated vomiting and aspiration pneumonia during the mean follow-up period of 2.5 ± 0.6 years. The mesh hiatal reinforcement with fundoplication for neurologically impaired children is safe and feasible.

Laparoscopic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair: Utilization Rates of Mesh in the USA and Short-Term Outcome Analysis

BACKGROUND

Many studies have shown that the utilization of mesh for paraesophageal hernia repair (PEHR) does not prevent recurrence. The aims of this study were (a) to assess the utilization of mesh for PEHR in the USA and (b) to compare the perioperative outcomes between PEHR with and without mesh.

METHODS

A retrospective population-based analysis was performed using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Adult patients who underwent laparoscopic PEHR with and without implantation of mesh between 2011 and 2014 were included. The yearly utilization of mesh, stratified by surgical approach, was estimated using the Poisson regression. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the effect of mesh on 30-day perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 9590 laparoscopic PEHR were included, 5814 (60.6%) without mesh and 3776 (39.4%) with mesh. The yearly rate of PEHR with implantation of mesh did not change significantly during the study period (39.4% mesh utilization in 2011, and 38.2% mesh utilization in 2014, p = 0.37). Patients undergoing PEHR with mesh, as compared to those without mesh, had similar incidence of 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality.

CONCLUSION

Even though there is no strong evidence to support its use, utilization rates of mesh for laparoscopic PEHR remained high and stable between 2011 and 2014 in the USA. The use of mesh was not associated with a higher incidence of postoperative complications.

Laparoscopic repair of giant paraesophageal hernia: are there factors associated with anatomic recurrence?

BACKGROUND

Repair of giant paraesophageal hernia (PEH) is associated with a favorably high rate of symptom improvement; however, rates of recurrence by objective measures remain high. Herein we analyze our experience with laparoscopic giant PEH repair to determine what factors if any can predict anatomic recurrence.

METHODS

We prospectively collected data on PEH characteristics, variations in operative techniques, and surgeon factors for 595 patients undergoing laparoscopic PEH repair from 2008 to 2015. Upper GI study was performed at 6 months postoperatively and selectively thereafter-any supra-diaphragmatic stomach was considered hiatal hernia recurrence. Exclusion criteria included revisional operation (22.4%), size <5 cm (17.6%), inadequate follow-up (17.8%), and confounding concurrent operations (6.9%). Inclusion criteria were met by 202 patients (31% male, median age 71 years, and median BMI 28.7).

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 6 months (IQR 6-12), overall anatomic recurrence rate was 34.2%. Symptom recurrence rate was 9.9% and revisional operation was required in ten patients (4.9%). Neither patient demographics nor PEH characteristics (size, presence of Cameron erosions, esophagitis, or Barrett's) correlated with anatomic recurrence. Technical factors at operation (mobilized intra-abdominal length of esophagus, Collis gastroplasty, number of anterior/posterior stitches, use of crural buttress, use of pledgeted or mattress sutures, or gastrostomy) were also not correlated with recurrence. Regarding surgeon factors, annual volume of fewer than ten cases per year was associated with increased risk of anatomic failure (54 vs 33%, P = 0.02). Multivariate analysis identified surgeon experience (<10 cases per year) as an independent factor associated with early hiatal hernia recurrence (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.34-10.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic repair of giant PEH is associated with high anatomic recurrence rate but excellent symptom control. PEH characteristics and technical operative variables do not appear to significantly affect rates of recurrence. In contrast, surgeon volume does appear to contribute significantly to durability of repair.

Pre-Existing Mesh at the Hiatus in Revisional Surgery Does Not Result in Increased Morbidity: A Case-Control Evaluation

BACKGROUND

Mesh is sometimes used to reinforce the hiatus during primary and reoperative fundoplication. This is a controversial practice as it is not clear that this leads to a decreased rate of failure of the hiatal closure, and concerns about morbidity related to the presence of mesh in this location exist. One of these concerns is that if reoperation is ever required (fundoplication herniates through the hiatus, for example), revisional surgery would be significantly more difficult and associated with a higher rate of morbidity than if mesh had not been placed at the hiatus in a previous procedure.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of prospectively collected data on 104 patients to undergo surgery for a failed fundoplication between 2011 and 2015. Fourteen patients (13.5%) had previous operations where mesh had been placed at the hiatus and underwent a subsequent revisional procedure. Procedures performed were reoperative fundoplication and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass as a salvage procedure for a failed fundoplication, especially in the setting of obesity. These 14 cases were matched 1:2 with randomly selected control patients from the database who underwent revisional surgery in whom mesh had not been placed at the original operation. Cases and controls were paired based on the number of previous revision attempts and operation type. Perioperative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in 30-day morbidity, readmission, operative time, or length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective case-control evaluation, mesh at the hiatus did have an impact on morbidity or operative time.

Tension-Free Inlay Repair of Large Hiatal Hernias Using Dual-Sided Composite PTFE/ePTFE Meshes in Laparoscopic Surgery for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) also frequently suffer from concomitant hiatal hernia. It has been described that a preoperative hiatal hernia of ≥3 cm is associated with a more than threefold relative risk for reflux symptom recurrence after fundoplication without mesh reinforcement. In this report, we describe our experience with the implantation of dual-sided composite PTFE/ePTFE meshes in a tension-free fashion during laparoscopic antireflux surgery (LARS).

METHODS

A prospective database containing data of all patients undergoing LARS and hiatal hernia repair with mesh implantation from January 2009 until December 2014 was interrogated. Ten patients with preoperative esophageal high resolution manometry and 24-hour pH impedance monitoring because of symptoms suggestive of GERD who received hiatal repair using dual-sided meshes in inlay technique were identified and included in this analysis.

RESULTS

There were no conversions to open surgery in the study group. Median operative time was 138 minutes (interquartile range Q1-Q3: 119-151 minutes) and average length of postoperative stay was 3.5 days (interquartile range Q1-Q3: 2.3-4.0 days). During a median follow-up period of 43.3 months (interquartile range Q1-Q3: 18.9-47.1 months), no redo operations had to be performed. Noteworthy, 2 patients complained about dysphagia (20%) during follow-up, but symptoms resolved after endoscopic interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Tension-free inlay repair of large hiatal hernias using dual-sided composite PTFE/ePTFE meshes during LARS provides promising results. It provides satisfactory symptom relief and prolonged control of GERD. Further studies to validate its efficiency in a larger collective are needed.

Surgical Treatment of Paraesophageal Hernias: A Review

The management of paraesophageal hernia (PEH) can be challenging due to the lack of consensus regarding indications and principles of operative treatment. In addition, data about the pathophysiology of the hernias are scant. Therefore, the goal of this review is to shed light and describe the classification, pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and indications for treatment of PEHs, and provide an overview of the surgical management and a description of the technical principles of the repair.

Long-term results and complications related to Crurasoft® mesh repair for paraesophageal hiatal hernias

PURPOSE

The application of mesh-reinforced hiatal closure has resulted in a significant reduction in recurrence rates in comparison with primary suture repair. However, the use of meshes has not completely extended in all the cases of large paraesophageal hiatal hernias (LPHH) due to the complications related to them. The aim of this study is to present our long-term results and complications related to Crurasoft^® mesh (Bard) for the treatment of LPHH.

METHODS

From January 2004 to December 2014, 536 consecutive patients underwent open or laparoscopic fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease or LPHH at Ramón y Cajal University Hospital. Primary simple suture of the crura and additional reinforcement with a Crurasoft^® mesh (Bard) was performed in 93 patients (17.35 %). Radiologic hiatal hernia recurrence and mesh-related complications were investigated.

RESULTS

Of the 93 patients undergoing mesh repair, there were 28 male and 65 female with a mean age of 67.27 years (range 22-87 years). Laparoscopic surgery was attended in 88.2 % of the cases, and open surgery in the rest 11.8 %. Mean operative time was 167.05 min (range 90-370 min). Median postoperative stay was 4.79 days (range 1-41 days). Conversion rate was 8.53 % (7 patients). Intraoperative complications were described in 10.75 % (10 patients), but all of them, except in one case, could be managed laparoscopically. Overall postoperative complications rate was 28 %. Early postoperative complications occurred in 11 patients (12 %), respectively, for grades 2 (6 cases), 3b (1 case) and 5 (4 cases) according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Late postoperative complications occurred in 15 patients (16 %), respectively, for grades 1 (7 cases), 2 (2 cases), 3b (5 cases) and 5 (1 case) according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Thirty day-mortality rate was 4.3 %. Mortality rate specific associated with the mesh was 1 %. Reoperation rate was 5.4 %. After a median follow-up of 76.33 months (range 3-130 months), 8 patients (9 %) developed a recurrent hiatal hernia. Mesh was removed in three cases (3.22 %).

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, the recurrence rate in patients with a Crurasoft^® (Bard) is acceptable. However, the rate of postoperative complications and mortality is excessive. The use of meshes in the hiatus keeps on being controversial due to the severe complications related to them. It would be advisable to compare our results in the non-mesh group in terms of recurrences and complications, to determine if meshes in the hiatus should be given in these patients due to its high rate of complications.

Reinforcement of hiatal defect repair with absorbable mesh fixed with non-permanent devices

AIM

To report the results of an open label prospective study on a new technique for laparoscopic hiatal hernia (HH) repair with absorbable mesh fixed with absorbable materials Methods: From January 2011 to May 2013, 43 patients were treated; group A, 20 patients submitted to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG); group B, 13 patients submitted to revisional surgery for the diagnosis of HH and symptomatic GERD post-LSG; and group C, ten patients submitted to 360° fundoplication. All patients underwent cruroplasty reinforced with bio-absorbable mesh fixed with absorbable tacks and/or fibrin glue. Conversion rate, intra-operative complications, operative time (tacks vs tacks plus fibrin glue), perioperative complications, perioperative symptoms and radiological control set the criteria for clinical/surgical evaluation.

RESULTS

Conversion and mortality rate was 0%. The mean time for mesh fixation with the tacks vs tacks plus fibrin glue was 6.2 ± 2 vs 7.3 ± 3 min. The remission of GERD symptoms was observed in 39 patients, and we did not observe any cases of mesh-related complications at a mean follow-up of 17.4 months. Recurrence rate was 2.3% (one asymptomatic patient of group B).

CONCLUSIONS

Reinforcement with absorbable mesh-cancel bio mesh is a safe and effective option for laparoscopic HH repair in normal weight and obese patients.

Hiatal hernia repair with biologic mesh reinforcement reduces recurrence rate in small hiatal hernias

The utility of mesh reinforcement for small hiatal hernia found especially during antireflux surgery is unknown. Initial reports for the use of biological mesh for crural reinforcement during repair for defects greater than 5 cm have been shown to decrease recurrence rates. This study compares patients with small hiatal hernias who underwent onlay biologic mesh buttress repair versus those with suture cruroplasty alone. This is a single-institution retrospective review of all patients undergoing repair of hiatal hernia measuring 1-5 cm between 2002 and 2009. The patients were evaluated based on surgical repair: one group undergoing crural reinforcement with onlay biologic mesh and other group with suture cruroplasty only. Seventy patients with hiatal hernia measuring 1-5 cm were identified. Thirty-eight patients had hernia repair with biologic mesh, and 32 patients had repair with suture cruroplasty only. Recurrence rate at 1 year was 16% (5/32) in patients who had suture cruroplasty only and 0% (0/38) in the group with crural reinforcement with absorbable mesh (statistically significant, P = 0.017). Suture cruroplasty alone appears to be inadequate for hiatal hernias measuring 1-5 cm with significant recurrence rate and failure of antireflux surgery. Crural reinforcement with absorbable mesh may reduce hiatal hernia recurrence rate in small hiatal hernias.

Current readings: Failed hiatal hernia repair

Recurrent hiatal hernia is noted in up to 70% of patients undergoing reoperative antireflux procedure. Role of short esophagus vis-à-vis a need for Collis gastroplasty, mesh reinforcement of hiatus, and access of surgery (thoracotomy vs laparotomy) have been debated. The aim of this article is to review selected recent publications that address these issues.

Dual-sided composite mesh repair of hiatal hernia: Our experience and a review of the Chinese literature

AIM: To summarize our experience in the application of Crurasoft^® for antireflux surgery and hiatal hernia (HH) repair and to introduce the work of Chinese doctors on this topic.

METHODS: Twenty-one patients underwent HH repair with Crurasoft^® reinforcement. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and HH-related symptoms including heartburn, regurgitation, chest pain, dysphagia, and abdominal pain were evaluated preoperatively and 6 mo postoperatively. A patient survey was conducted by phone by one of the authors. Patients were asked about “recurrent reflux or heartburn” and “dysphagia”. An internet-based Chinese literature search in this field was also performed. Data extracted from each study included: number of patients treated, hernia size, hiatorrhaphy, antireflux surgery, follow-up period, recurrence rate, and complications (especially dysphagia).

RESULTS: There were 8 type I, 10 type II and 3 type III HHs in this group. Mean operative time was 119.29 min (range 80-175 min). Intraoperatively, length and width of the hiatal orifice were measured, (4.33 ± 0.84 and 2.85 ± 0.85 cm, respectively). Thirteen and eight Nissen and Toupet fundoplications were performed, respectively. The intraoperative complication rate was 9.52%. Despite dysphagia, GERD-related symptoms improved significantly compared with those before surgery. The recurrence rate was 0% during the 6-mo follow-up period, and long-term follow-up disclosed a recurrence rate of 4.76% with a mean period of 16.28 mo. Eight patients developed new-onset dysphagia. The Chinese literature review identified 12 papers with 213 patients. The overall recurrence rate was 1.88%. There was no esophageal erosion and the rate of dysphagia ranged from 0% to 24%.

CONCLUSION: The use of Crurasoft^® mesh for HH repair results in satisfactory symptom control with a low recurrence rate. Postoperative dysphagia continues to be an issue, and requires more research to reduce its incidence.