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

Comparative anatomic and symptomatic recurrence outcomes of diaphragmatic suture cruroplasty versus biosynthetic mesh reinforcement in robotic hiatal and paraesophageal hernia repair

BACKGROUND

Hiatal and paraesophageal hernia (HH/PEH) recurrence is the most common cause of failure after gastroesophageal anti-reflux surgery. Crural reinforcement with mesh has been suggested to address this issue, but its efficacy remains debated. In this study, we aimed to determine the impact of biosynthetic mesh reinforcement compared to suture cruroplasty on anatomic and symptomatic hernia recurrence.

METHOD

Data of patients who underwent robotic HH/PEH repair with suture cruroplasty with or without biosynthetic mesh reinforcement between January 2012 and April 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. Gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms and anatomic hernia recurrence were assessed at short-term (3 months to 1 year) and longer-term (≥ 1 year) follow-up. Symptomatic hernia recurrence was defined as having both anatomic recurrence and symptoms.

RESULTS

Out of the 503 patients in the study, 308 had undergone biosynthetic mesh repair, while 195 had suture-only repair. After the surgery, both groups demonstrated comparable improvements in symptoms. Short-term anatomic hernia recurrence rates were 11.8% and 15.6% for mesh and suture groups, respectively (p = 0.609), while longer-term rates were 24.7% and 44.9% (p = 0.015). The rates of symptomatic hernia recurrence in the same group were 8.8% and 14.6% in the short-term (p = 0.256), and 17.2% and 42.2% in longer-term follow-ups (p = 0.003). In the repair of medium and large-size hernias, mesh reinforcement resulted in a 50.0% relative risk reduction in anatomic hernia recurrences and a 59.2% reduction in symptomatic hernia recurrences at ≥ 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

After more than a year of follow-up, it has been found that using biosynthetic mesh for medium and large hiatal or paraesophageal hernia repair significantly reduces the likelihood of both anatomic and symptomatic recurrence compared to using only suture cruroplasty. These findings strongly support the use of biosynthetic mesh to manage larger hernias. However, further long-term multicenter randomized studies are needed to provide more conclusive evidence.

Risk factors associated with radiological and clinical recurrences after laparoscopic repair of large hiatal hernia with TiO2Mesh™ reinforcement

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic repair of large para-esophageal hiatal hernias (LPHH) remains controversial. Several meta-analyses suggest hiatus reinforcement with mesh has better outcomes over cruroplasty in terms of less recurrence. The aim of this study was to evaluate the medium-term results of treating LPHH with a biosynthetic monofilament polypropylene mesh coated with titanium dioxide to enhance biocompatibility (TiO2Mesh™).

METHODS

A retrospective observational study, using data extracted from a prospectively collected database was performed at XXX from December 2014 to June 2023. Included participants were all patients who underwent laparoscopic repair of large (> 5 cm) type III hiatal hernia in which a TiO2Mesh™ was used. The results of the study, including clinical and radiological recurrences as well as mesh-related morbidity, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven patients were finally analyzed. Laparoscopic approach was attempted in all but conversion was needed in one patient because of bleeding in the lesser curvature. With a median follow-up of 41 months (and 10 losses to follow-up), 22% of radiological recurrences and 19.3% of clinical recurrences were described. Regarding complications, one patient presented morbidity associated with the mesh (mesh erosion requiring endoscopic extraction). Recurrent hernia repair was an independent factor of clinical recurrence (OR 4.57 95% CI (1.28-16.31)).

CONCLUSION

LPHH with TiO2Mesh™ is safe and feasible with a satisfactory medium-term recurrence and a low complication rate. Prospective randomized studies are needed to establish the standard repair of LPHH.

Emerging materials and technologies for advancing bioresorbable surgical meshes

Surgical meshes play a significant role in the treatment of various medical conditions, such as hernias, pelvic floor issues, guided bone regeneration, and wound healing. To date, commercial surgical meshes are typically made of non-absorbable synthetic polymers, notably polypropylene and polytetrafluoroethylene, which are associated with postoperative complications, such as infections. Biological meshes, based on native tissues, have been employed to overcome such complications, though mechanical strength has been a main disadvantage. The right balance in mechanical and biological performances has been achieved by the advent of bioresorbable meshes. Despite improvements, recurrence of clinical complications associated with surgical meshes raises significant concerns regarding the technical adequacy of current materials and designs, pointing to a crucial need for further development. To this end, current research focuses on the design of meshes capable of biomimicking native tissue and facilitating the healing process without post-operative complications. Researchers are actively investigating advanced bioresorbable materials, both synthetic polymers and natural biopolymers, while also exploring the performance of therapeutic agents, surface modification methods and advanced manufacturing technologies such as 4D printing. This review seeks to evaluate emerging biomaterials and technologies for enhancing the performance and clinical applicability of the next-generation surgical meshes. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: In the ever-transforming landscape of regenerative medicine, the embracing of engineered bioabsorbable surgical meshes stands as a key milestone in addressing persistent challenges and complications associated with existing treatments. The urgency to move beyond conventional non-absorbable meshes, fraught with post-surgery complications, emphasises the necessity of using advanced biomaterials for engineered tissue regeneration. This review critically examines the growing field of absorbable surgical meshes, considering their potential to transform clinical practice. By strategically combining mechanical strength with bioresorbable characteristics, these innovative meshes hold the promise of mitigating complications and improving patient outcomes across diverse medical applications. As we navigate the complexities of modern medicine, this exploration of engineered absorbable meshes emerges as a promising approach, offering an overall perspective on biomaterials, technologies, and strategies adopted to redefine the future of surgical meshes.

Foregut Erosion Related to Biomedical Implants: A Scoping Review

Introduction: Biomedical devices implanted transabdominally have gained popularity over the past 50 years in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease, paraesophageal hiatal hernia, and morbid obesity. Device-related foregut erosions (FEs) represent a challenging event that demands special attention owing to the potential of severe postoperative complications and death. Purpose: The aim was to provide an overview of full-thickness foregut injury leading to erosion associated with four types of biomedical devices. Methods: The study was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were queried until December 31, 2023. Eligible studies included all articles reporting data, management, and outcomes on device-related FE. Results: Overall, 132 articless were included for a total of 1292 patients suffering from device-related FE. Four different devices were included: the Angelchik antireflux prosthesis (AAP) (n = 25), nonabsorbable mesh for crural repair (n = 60), adjustable gastric banding (n = 1156), and magnetic sphincter augmentation device (n = 51). The elapsed time from device implant to erosion ranged from 1 to 480 months. Most commonly reported symptoms were dysphagia and epigastric pain, while acute presentation was reported rarely and mainly for gastric banding. The technique for device removal evolved from more invasive open approaches toward minimally invasive and endoscopic techniques. Esophagectomy and gastrectomy were mostly reported for nonabsorbable mesh FE. Overall mortality was .17%. Conclusions: Device-related FE is rare but may occur many years after AAP, nonabsorbable mesh, adjustable gastric banding, and magnetic sphincter augmentation implant. FE-related mortality is infrequent, however, increased postoperative morbidity and the need for esophagogastric resection were observed for nonabsorbable mesh-reinforced cruroplasty.

Lessons learned from revision procedures: a case series pleading for reinforcement of the anterior hiatus in recurrent hiatal hernia

BACKGROUND

Hiatal Hernia (HH) is a common structural defect of the diaphragm. Laparoscopic repair with suturing of the hiatal pillars followed by fundoplication has become standard practice. In an attempt to lower HH recurrence rates, mesh reinforcement, commonly located at the posterior site of the esophageal hiatus, has been used. However, effectiveness of posterior mesh augmentation is still up to debate. There is a lack of understanding of the mechanism of recurrence requiring further investigation. We investigated the anatomic location of HH recurrences in an attempt to assess why HH recurrence rates remain high despite various attempts with mesh reinforcement.

METHODS

A retrospective case series of prospectively collected data from patients with hiatal hernia repair between 2012 and 2020 was performed. In total, 54 patients with a recurrent hiatal hernia operation were included in the study. Video clips from the revision procedure were analyzed by a surgical registrar and senior surgeon to assess the anatomic location of recurrent HH. For the assessment, the esophageal hiatus was divided into four equal quadrants. Additionally, patient demographics, hiatal hernia characteristics, and operation details were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

54 patients were included. The median time between primary repair and revision procedure was 25 months (IQR 13-95, range 0-250). The left-anterior quadrant was involved in 43 patients (80%), the right-anterior quadrant in 21 patients (39%), the left-posterior quadrant in 21 patients (39%), and the right-posterior quadrant in 10 patients (19%).

CONCLUSION

In this study, hiatal hernia recurrences occured most commonly at the left-anterior quadrant of the hiatus, however, posterior recurrences were not uncommon. Based on our results, we hypothesize that both posterior and anterior hiatal reinforcement might be a suitable solution to lower the recurrence rate of hiatal hernia. A randomized controlled trial using a circular, bio-absorbable mesh has been initiated to test our hypothesis.

BRAZILIAN HERNIA AND ABDOMINAL WALL SOCIETY STATEMENT ON LARGE HIATAL HERNIAS MANAGEMENT

Large hiatal hernias, besides being more prevalent in the elderly, have a different clinical presentation: less reflux, more mechanical symptoms, and a greater possibility of acute, life-threatening complications such as gastric volvulus, ischemia, and visceral mediastinal perforation. Thus, surgical indications are distinct from gastroesophageal reflux disease-related sliding hiatal hernias. Heartburn tends to be less intense, while symptoms of chest pain, cough, discomfort, and tiredness are reported more frequently. Complaints of vomiting and dysphagia may suggest the presence of associated gastric volvulus. Signs of iron deficiency and anemia are found. Surgical indication is still controversial and was previously based on high mortality reported in emergency surgeries for gastric volvulus. Postoperative mortality is especially related to three factors: body mass index above 35, age over 70 years, and the presence of comorbidities. Minimally invasive elective surgery should be offered to symptomatic individuals with good or reasonable performance status, regardless of age group. In asymptomatic and oligosymptomatic patients, besides obviously identifying the patient's desire, a case-by-case analysis of surgical risk factors such as age, obesity, and comorbidities should be taken into consideration. Attention should also be paid to situations with greater technical difficulty and risks of acute migration due to increased abdominal pressure (abdominoplasty, manual labor, spastic diseases). Technical alternatives such as partial fundoplication and anterior gastropexy can be considered. We emphasize the importance of performing surgical procedures in cases of large hiatal hernias in high-volume centers, with experienced surgeons.

Evidence mapping on how to perform an optimal surgical repair of large hiatal hernias

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic and large hiatal hernia (HH) is a common disorder requiring surgical management. However, there is a lack of systematic, evidence-based recommendations summarizing recent reviews on surgical treatment of symptomatic HH. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to create evidence mapping on the key technical issues of HH repair based on the highest available evidence.

METHODS

A systematic review identified studies on eight key issues of large symptomatic HH repair. The literature was screened for the highest level of evidence (LE from level 1 to 5) according to the Oxford Center for evidence-based medicine's scale. For each topic, only studies of the highest available level of evidence were considered.

RESULTS

Out of the 28.783 studies matching the keyword algorithm, 47 were considered. The following recommendations could be deduced: minimally invasive surgery is the recommended approach (LE 1a); a complete hernia sac dissection should be considered (LE 3b); extensive division of short gastric vessels cannot be recommended; however, limited dissection of the most upper vessels may be helpful for a floppy fundoplication (LE 1a); vagus nerve should be preserved (LE 3b); a dorso-ventral cruroplasty is recommended (LE 1b); routine fundoplication should be considered to prevent postoperative gastroesophageal reflux (LE 2b); posterior partial fundoplication should be favored over other forms of fundoplication (LE 1a); mesh augmentation is indicated in large HH with paraesophageal involvement (LE 1a).

CONCLUSION

The current evidence mapping is a reasonable instrument based on the best evidence available to guide surgeons in determining optimal symptomatic and large HH repair.

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.