Mid-term safety profile evaluation of Bio-A absorbable synthetic mesh as cruroplasty reinforcement

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.

Robotic revision surgery after failed Nissen anti-reflux surgery: a single center experience and a literature review

BACKGROUND

The gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) worldwide prevalence is increasing maybe due to population aging and the obesity epidemic. Nissen fundoplication is the most common surgical procedure for GERD with a failure rate of approximately 20% which might require a redo surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic redo procedures after anti-reflux surgery failure including a narrative review.

METHODS

We reviewed our 15-year experience from 2005 to 2020 including 317 procedures, 306 for primary, and 11 for revisional surgery.

RESULTS

Patients included in the redo series underwent primary Nissen fundoplication with a mean age of 57.6 years (range, 43-71). All procedures were minimally invasive and no conversion to open surgery was registered. The meshes were used in five (45.45%) patients. The mean operative time was 147 min (range, 110-225) and the mean hospital stay was 3.2 days (range, 2-7). At a mean follow-up of 78 months (range, 18-192), one patient suffered for persistent dysphagia and one for delayed gastric emptying. We had two (18.19%) Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa complications, consisting of postoperative pneumothoraxes treated with chest drainage.

CONCLUSION

Redo anti-reflux surgery is indicated in selected patients and the robotic approach is safe when it is performed in specialized centers, considering its surgical technical difficulty.

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.

Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery With Concomitant Hiatal Hernia Repair Using an Absorbable Tissue Matrix

BACKGROUND

Hiatal hernias are a common finding in patients who undergo bariatric surgery with an incidence of about 20% of all bariatric patients. Controversy exists on the utility of a biosynthetic tissue matrix (BTM) usage in combination with crural repair. This study was designed to explore the safety and benefits of the use of a BTM during concomitant hiatal hernia repair with bariatric surgical procedures.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review of bariatric surgical patients who underwent a concomitant hiatal hernia repair at a single practice at a tertiary academic medical center from January 2014 to February 2019.

RESULTS

A total of 420 patients were reviewed. Hiatal BTM reinforcement, recurrence, and postoperative proton pump inhibitor use were reported by type of operation. Recurrence was higher in gastric bypass patients who underwent hiatal hernia repair with suture cruroplasty alone vs. those who also underwent hiatal BTM reinforcement (7.1% vs. 3.7%, P = .52) and significantly higher in gastric sleeve patients who underwent hiatal hernia repair with suture cruroplasty alone vs. those who also underwent hiatal BTM reinforcement (7.1% vs. .5%, P = .01). No patient required reoperation for hiatal hernia recurrence.

DISCUSSION

Performing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or vertical sleeve gastrectomy with concomitant hiatal hernia repair is safe and durable. Employing crural reinforcement with BTM may be of benefit in reducing recurrence rates of hiatal hernia, particularly in sleeve gastrectomy patients.

Does the use of bioabsorbable mesh for hiatal hernia repair at the time of bariatric surgery reduce recurrence rates? A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anywhere from 16% to 37% of patients undergoing bariatric and metabolic surgery are estimated to have a hiatal hernia. To address the lack of long-term data showing the efficacy of bioabsorbable mesh in reducing the recurrence of hiatal hernia in patients who undergo bariatric surgery, we evaluated the world literature and performed a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate hiatal hernia recurrence rates after placement of bioabsorbable mesh in bariatric patients.

SETTING

Meta-analysis of world literature.

METHODS

We performed a literature search using PubMed and MEDLINE with search terms including "hiatal hernia recurrence," "bariatric surgery," "bioabsorbable mesh," "Gore BIO-A," and "trimethylene carbonate." Analysis was conducted to compare surgical time, length of stay, recurrence rate, hernia size, and changes in body mass index before and after surgery between mesh-group (MG) and nonmesh (NM) patients. The meta-analysis was described using standardized mean difference, weighted mean difference, effect size, and 95% confidence interval (CI). An I² statistic was computed to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Twelve studies with 1351 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Four studies had both an MG and an NM group. There were 668 patients in the MG and 683 patients in the NM group. Hernia size noted in the NM group (7 cm²) was compared with that in the MG (6.5 cm²) (95% CI: 3.89-9.14; P = .86). The MG had fewer recurrences than the NM group (effect size, 2% versus 14%; 95% CI: -.26 to -.02; P = .027). The average follow-up was 28.8 months for the MG and 32.8 months for the NM group.

CONCLUSION

Repair with bioabsorbable mesh at the time of the index bariatric surgery is more effective at reducing the recurrence rate of hiatal hernia than suture cruroplasty. Further studies investigating the long-term outcomes of bioabsorbable mesh placed at the time of bariatric surgery are needed.

Is fundoplication necessary after paraesophageal hernia repair? A meta-analysis and systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Paraesophageal hernias are often asymptomatic, but when symptomatic they should be fixed laparoscopically. A cruroplasty of the diaphragmatic pillars is performed and a fundoplication is usually performed at the time. However, there are times, especially in emergency cases, where it is not always possible to perform a fundoplication. We hypothesized there would be no difference in outcomes whether or not a fundoplication is performed as part of a paraesophageal hernia repair.

METHODS

A literature review of available clinical databases was performed using PubMed, Clinical Key and Google Scholar. Our search terms were: "paraesophageal hernia" "paraesophageal hernia repair" "fundoplication" "emergency surgery" "no fundoplication" We excluded studies that were in languages other than English, abstracts and small case series.

RESULTS

Our search criteria yielded a total of 22 studies published between 1997 and 2020. There were a total of 8600 subjects enrolled into this study. The overall pooled prevalence of fundoplication were estimated as 69% (95% CI: 59%-78%). In patients who underwent fundoplication, the risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) was reduced as compared to patients who did not undergo fundoplication (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.40-1.04, p = 0.069, I2 = 47.2%). A similar trend was also observed in recurrence (RR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.27-1.03, p = 0.061, I2 = 0.0%) and reoperations (RR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.02-2.69, p = 0.25, I2 = 56.7%). However, patients who underwent fundoplication had an increased risk of dysphagia (RR: 1.68, 95% CI: 0.59-4.81, p = 0.83, I2 = 42%).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a higher rate of recurrence of gastroesophageal reflux disease, recurrence of hernia and reoperation when no fundoplication is performed during a paraesophageal hernia repair but a lower risk of dysphagia, but none of these reached statistical significance.(Comment 1) Paraesophageal hernia repair with fundoplication should be performed, but it is acceptable to not do it in certain situations.

Medium-term safety and efficacy profile of paraesophageal hernia repair with Phasix-ST® mesh: a single-institution experience

BACKGROUND

Hernia recurrence after laparoscopic repair is a perplexing problem. In an effort to reduce anatomical and clinical recurrences, different type of meshes have been used to bolster the esophageal hiatus.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess safety, medium-term efficacy, and quality of life improvement after laparoscopic repair of hiatal hernia reinforced with a biosynthetic absorbable mesh (Phasix-ST^®).

METHODS

Observational single-center retrospective single-arm cohort study (November 2015-February 2021). We included all adult patients (> 18 years old) who underwent laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair with Phasix-ST^® mesh and Toupet fundoplication.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients were included. The median postoperative stay was 3.2 days (range 2-9) and the postoperative complication rate was 11.7%. The median follow-up time was 27 months (range 1-53). No mesh-related complications were detected. Hernia recurrence was diagnosed in six patients (8.8%). The recurrence-free probability at 34 months was 0.89 (95% CI 0.807-0.988) while at 60 months was 0.86 (95% CI 0.76-0.97). Hernia recurrences were mostly observed between 21 and 36 months after the operation. None of the patients required surgical revision and all were managed with PPI. Postoperative dysphagia requiring endoscopic balloon dilatation occurred in 2.9% of patients. Compared to baseline, both the GERD-HRQL (15.2 ± 6.2 vs. 3.2 ± 3.1; p = 0.026) and all SF-36 items were significantly improved (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic crura augmentation with Phasix-ST^® mesh combined with a Toupet fundoplication is safe and seems effective in the medium-term follow-up. Phasix-ST^® crural reinforcement resulted in low hernia recurrence rate with a sustained symptoms and quality of life improvement.

Low-pressure Pneumoperitoneum With Abdominal Wall Lifting Versus Standard Pressure Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Fundoplication for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the treatment results of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with abdominal wall lifting (AWL+LP, 6 mm Hg) versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum (SP, 12 mm Hg) during laparoscopic fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), using propensity score matching (PSM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was made of 362 patients, 123 in the AWL+LP group and 239 in the SP group, who underwent laparoscopic fundoplication for GERD from January 2010 to December 2017. Perioperative and prognostic outcomes were compared after PSM with 1:1 match.

RESULTS

After PSM, 107 matched pairs were obtained. Compared with the SP group at 30 and 60 minutes after pneumoperitoneal initiation, the AWL+LP group showed significantly lower end-tidal carbon dioxide value (P<0.001, <0.001, respectively), lower partial pressure of carbon dioxide value (P<0.001, 0.016, respectively) and significantly higher pH value (P<0.001, <0.001, respectively). However, postoperative shoulder pain, abdominal pain, and arrhythmia in the AWL+LP group were less than those in SP group (P=0.01, 0.017, 0.005, respectively). There was no significant difference in operative time (106.54±27.80 vs. 107.38±24.78 min), blood loss [15 mL (interquartile range: 12.5 to 20 mL) vs.15 mL (interquartile range: 10 to 20 mL)], length of stay (4 vs. 4 d), the wound ecchymosis [2 (1.87%) vs. 3 (2.80%)] and rates of recurrence [8 (7.48%) vs. 5 (4.67%)] between AWL+LP group and SP group.

CONCLUSION

AWL+LP resulted in comparable perioperative and prognostic outcomes with less impact on changes in cardiorespiratory function compared with SP approaches of laparoscopic fundoplication for GERD.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Diaphragmatic Herniation following Esophagectomy for Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the incidence and risk factors of diaphragmatic herniation following esophagectomy for cancer (DHEC), and assess the results of surgical repair.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The current incidence of DHEC is discussed with conflicting data regarding its treatment and natural course.

METHODS

Monocentric retrospective cohort study(2009-2018). From 902 patients, 719 patients with a complete follow-up of CT-scans after transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer were reexamined to identify the occurrence of a DHEC. The incidence of DHEC was estimated using Kalbfleisch and Prentice method and risk factors of DHEC were studied using the Fine and Gray competitive risk regression model by treating death as a competing event. Survival was analyzed.

RESULTS

5-year DHEC incidence was 10.3% [95%CI, 7.8%-13.2%](n = 59), asymptomatic in 54.2% of cases. In the multivariable analysis, the risk factors for DHEC were: presence of hiatal hernia on preoperative CT scan (HR = 1.72[1.01-2.94], p = 0.046), previous hiatus surgery (HR = 3.68[1.61-8.45], p = 0.002), gastroesophageal junction tumor location (HR = 3.51[1.91-6.45], p < 0.001), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (HR = 4.27[1.70-10.76], p < 0.001), and minimally invasive abdominal phase (HR = 2.98[1.60-5.55], p < 0.001). A cure for DHEC was achieved in 55.9%. The postoperative mortality rate was nil, the overall morbidity rate was 12.1%, and the DHEC recurrence rate was 30.3%. Occurrence of DHEC was significantly associated with a lower hazard rate of death in a time-varying Cox's regression analysis (HR = 0.43[0.23-0.81], p = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

The 5-year incidence of DHEC is 10.3% and is associated with a favorable prognosis. Surgical repair of symptomatic or progressive DHEC is associated with an acceptable morbidity. However, the optimal surgical repair technique remains to be determined in view of the large number of recurrences.

When should we use mesh in laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair? A systematic review

The use of mesh in laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair (LHHR) remains controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the usefulness of mesh in patients with large hiatal hernia (HH), obesity, recurrent HH, and complicated HH. We performed a systematic review of the current literature regarding the outcomes of LHHR with mesh reinforcement. All articles between 2000 and 2020 describing LHHR with primary suturing, mesh reinforcement, or those comparing both techniques were included. Symptom improvement, quality of life (QoL) improvement, and recurrence rates were evaluated in patients with large HH, obesity, recurrent HH, and complicated HH. Reported outcomes of the use of mesh in patients with large HH had wide variability and heterogeneity. Morbidly obese patients with HH should undergo a weight-loss procedure. However, the benefits of HH repair with mesh are unclear in these patients. Mesh reinforcement during redo LHHR may be beneficial in terms of QoL improvement and hernia recurrence. There is scarce evidence supporting the use of mesh in patients undergoing LHHR for complicated HH. Current data are heterogeneous and have failed to find significant differences when comparing primary suturing with mesh reinforcement. Further research is needed to determine in which patients undergoing LHHR mesh placement would be beneficial.

Transhiatal Migration After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Myth or Reality? A Multicenter, Retrospective Study on the Incidence and Clinical Impact

PURPOSE

Only anecdotally reported, intrathoracic migration (ITM) represents an unacknowledged complication after sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) contributing to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) development, both recurrent and de novo. The primary endpoint of this study was to evaluate the incidence of postoperative ITM ≥ 2 cm; the secondary endpoint was to determine the relationships between ITM, GERD, endoscopic findings, and percentage of patients requiring surgical revision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective, multicenter study on prospective databases was conducted, analyzing LSGs performed between 2013 and 2018. Inclusion criteria consisted of primary operation; BMI ranging 35-60 kg/m²; age 18-65 years; minimum follow-up 24 months; and postoperative UGIE, excluding concomitant hiatal hernia repair. Esophageal manometry and 24-h pH-metry were indicated, based on postoperative questionnaires and UGIE; patients with GERD due to ITM, and non-responders to medical therapy, were converted to R-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

RESULTS

An ITM ≥ 2cm was postoperatively diagnosed in 94 patients (7% of 1337 LSGs), after mean 24.16 ± 13.6 months. Postoperative esophagitis was found in 29 patients vs. 15 initially (p=0.001), while GERD was demonstrated in 75 (vs. 20 preoperatively, p< 0.001). Fifteen patients (16%) underwent revision to RYGB with posterior cruroplasty. Seventeen patients with severe GERD presented improvement of endoscopic findings and clinical symptoms as a result of conservative therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

ITM after LSG is not a negligible complication and represents an important pathogenic factor in the development or worsening of GERD. Postoperative UGIE plays a fundamental role in the diagnosis of esophageal mucosal lesions.

Concomitant hiatal hernia repair during bariatric surgery: does the reinforcement make the difference?

BACKGROUND

Hiatal hernia repair (HHR) is still controversial during bariatric procedures, especially in case of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

AIMS

to report the long-term results of concomitant HHR, evaluating the safety and efficacy of posterior cruroplasty (PC), simple or reinforced with biosynthetic, absorbable Bio-A^® mesh (Gore, Flagstaff, AZ, USA). Primary endpoint: PC's failure, defined as symptomatic HH recurrence, nonresponding to medical treatment and requiring revisional surgery.

METHODS

The prospective database of 1876 bariatric operations performed in a center of excellence between 2011-2019 was searched for concomitant HHR. Intraoperative measurement of the hiatal surface area (HSA) was performed routinely.

RESULTS

A total of 250 patients undergone bariatric surgery and concomitant HHR (13%). Simple PC (group A, 151 patients) was performed during 130 LSG, 5 re-sleeves and 16 gastric bypasses; mean BMI 43.4±5.8 kg/m², HSA mean size 3.4±2 cm². Reinforced PC (group B) was performed in 99 cases: 62 primary LSG, 22 LGB and 15 revisions of LSG; mean BMI 44.6±7.7 kg/m2, HSA mean size 6.7±2 cm². PC's failure, with intrathoracic migration (ITM) of the LSG was encountered in 12 cases (8%) of simple vs. only 4 cases (4%) of reinforced PC (P=0.23); hence, a repeat, reinforced PC and R-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) was performed laparoscopically in all cases. No mesh-related complications were registered perioperatively or after long-term follow-up (mean 50 months). One case of cardiac metaplasia without goblet cells was detected 4 years postoperatively; conversion to LRYGB, with reinforced redo of the PC was performed. The Cox hazard analysis showed that the use of more than four stitches for cruroplasty represents a negative factor on recurrence (HR=8; P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

An aggressive search for and repair of HH during any bariatric procedure seems advisable, allowing a low HH recurrence rates. Additional measures, like mesh reinforcement of crural closure with biosynthetic, absorbable mesh, seem to improve results on long term follow-up, especially in case of larger hiatal defects. In our experience, reinforcement of even smaller defects seems advisable in obese population.

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.

Platelet-rich plasma PRP vs. absorbable mesh as cruroplasty reinforcement: a study on an animal model

BACKGROUND

Reinforcement of posterior cruroplasty has been proposed to minimize the failure of hiatal hernia repair (HHR). The applications of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and absorbable mesh are barely reported in this area.

AIMS

To analyze local macroscopic and microscopic changes induced by mesh vs. PRP as reinforcement of HHR, using a reliable laparoscopic experimental porcine model.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This prospective, comparative pilot study was conducted on 14 female pigs, aged four to six months. An iatrogenic hiatal defect was laparoscopically simulated and repaired, reinforced with Bio-A® mesh (group A) or PRP (group B). Specimen retrieval was performed after seven months for histopathological (HP) examination.

RESULTS

No local or general complications were registered, with complete resorption of reinforcements, that determined inflammatory infiltrates with local collagen production and tissue neo-vascularization. Group A had an increased mean chronic inflammation score (p = .3061), showing significant sclerotic collagenizing process. PRP enhanced angiogenesis, collagenizing, myofibroblast recruitment and tissue ingrowth.

CONCLUSIONS

No residual materials or evidence of anatomical distortion were found. Animal model was safe and reliable. This is the first report of complete absorption of Bio-A^® positioned on crural area. HP results suggest the clinical application of PRP in HHR as a promising co-adjuvant to local remodeling and healing.Abbreviations: ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists; AB: Alcian Blue; PAS: Periodic Acid-Schiff; CP: platelet concentrate; fPC: filtered plasma concentrate; GERD: gastro-esophageal reflux disease; HSA: hiatal surface area; HHR: hiatal hernia repair; HP: histopathological; HH: hiatal hernia; HE: hematoxylin and eosin; HR: hiatus repair alone; HRM: hiatus repair and acellular dermal matrix; NM: Nicolae Manolesccu; LNF: laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication; PC: posterior cruroplasty; PPP: platelet-poor plasma; RP: platelet-rich plasma.

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.