Mesh erosion after hiatal hernia repair: the tip of the iceberg?

One-year outcomes of biological mesh in hiatal hernia repair: a real-world study

PURPOSE

The placement of synthetic mesh during laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair has been verified to reduce postoperative recurrence, but mesh erosion and other related complications may occur to synthetic mesh, and our aim was to verify the safety and efficacy of biological mesh in hiatal hernia repair.

METHODS

Patients with hiatal hernia who were treated at a tertiary teaching university hospital from December 2020 to May 2023 were prospectively included in this study. General clinical data, hernia-related data, and intraoperative data were collected, and the patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, after 12 months, follow-up as needed for primary outcome until September 2024. The following parameters were recorded during follow-up visit: gastroesophageal reflux symptoms, Gastroesophageal reflux disease-Health related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) questionnaire, postoperative recurrence, mesh-related complications and patients' overall satisfaction.

RESULTS

A total of 82 patients with hiatal hernia were included in this study. The mean age of the patients was 62.68 ± 15.93 years, mean BMI 24.81 ± 4.05 kg/m2, the average operation time was 128.21 ± 39.20 min. There was statistically significant improvement of GERD symptom postoperative (p<0.05). 72 cases (93.5%) were rated as "Great" on the GERD-HRQL at the 12 months after surgery; 65 cases (84.4%) were rated as "very satisfactory" on the overall satisfaction scale at the 12 months after surgery. 6 patients (7.3%) experienced recurrences, with no mesh-related complications reported during the follow-up.

CONCLUSION

At a mean follow-up of 25.43 ± 10.38 months, the present study showed that laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair with biologic mesh results in low rates of 1-year recurrence and complications and increased patient satisfaction.

Hiatal Hernia Repair: A Century Between Soresi and da Vinci

A minimally invasive approach is the most common technique for hiatal hernia repair. The robotic platform offers a unique advantage that addresses the limitations of a laparoscopic repair. The steps of a robotic hiatal hernia repair include reduction of hernia contents, dissection of hernia sac, circumferential dissection of esophagus with 2.5 to 3 cm of intraabdominal esophagus, crural closure, and partial or complete fundoplication. The robotic hiatal hernia repair has comparable perioperative outcomes to the laparoscopic approach. This article discusses current controversies, limitations, and new technologies.

Antireflux surgeries and hiatal repair: keys to success

INTRODUCTION

Gastroesophageal reflux is common, and when medical therapy is ineffective, alternative treatments should be considered. Nissen fundoplication controls reflux but can be followed by side effects such as dysphagia and flatulence. To improve outcomes, modifications have been advocated.

AREAS COVERED

Modifications to Nissen fundoplication and newer procedures for gastroesophageal reflux aim to improve overall outcome. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and long-term outcomes from large cohorts are prioritized to consider the optimal procedure for reflux and hiatus hernia.

EXPERT OPINION

Fundoplication is an effective treatment for gastroesophageal reflux, with success rates of >80% reported at 18-20-year follow-up. RCTs confirm that Nissen fundoplication delivers better reflux control than medication. However, some patients are troubled by side effects. Anterior and posterior partial fundoplication variants have been proposed as procedures that offer equally good reflux control, but fewer side effects, and RCTs have confirmed this with follow-up to 20 years. Which partial fundoplication is better is debated. Alternative laparoscopic or endoscopic approaches require expensive implants or equipment and deliver less reliable reflux control than partial fundoplication. Currently, level I evidence confirms that laparoscopic partial fundoplication delivers the optimal outcome in fit patients with reflux that is not well controlled by medication.

ENDOSCOPIC MANAGEMENT OF MESH MIGRATION FOLLOWING HIATAL HERNIA REPAIR

BACKGROUND

The use of mesh in the repair of large hiatal hernias is still controversial. One of the most feared adverse events related to the use of mesh is erosion into the esophageal and gastric walls.

AIMS

To record the endoscopic treatment of mesh that has migrated into the gastric lumen after surgical treatment of hiatal hernia.

METHODS

The technical option was to wait for the progressive migration of the mesh into the gastric lumen, monitoring with upper digestive endoscopy, with removal by traction at the best time, with the aid of foreign body forceps.

RESULTS

The mesh was completely removed, and the evolution was satisfactory, without complications.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with mesh migration into the stomach who are oligosymptomatic and do not show signs of complications, endoscopic surveillance and subsequent removal of the foreign body can be successfully performed when the mesh is not adhered to the gastric wall, avoiding surgical procedures with high morbidity and mortality.

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.

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.

New Developments in Anti-Reflux Surgery: Where Are We Now?

Background

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is one of the most common chronic diseases, affecting up to 28% of the western population. Therapeutic management ranges from conservative measures to endoscopic or surgical interventions. Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) still is considered as gold standard, but alternative procedures have been developed and evaluated within the past years.

Summary

Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA), which aims to be a less disruptive and possibly more standardized laparoscopic procedure than LNF, shows satisfying results regarding short- and long-term follow-up as well as comorbidities. Alternatives, such as the RefluxStop™ procedure or Transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF), combined with laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair (cTIF) show promising results for short-term follow-up, nevertheless further studies regarding long-term follow-up are necessary.

Key Message

Although there definitely are upcoming and promising trends in upper GI surgery, LNF still represents today's gold standard and MSA is an equivalent alternative. RefluxStop™ and cTIF show promising results, nevertheless, further studies are necessary.

Mesh vs. non-mesh repair of type I hiatal hernias: a propensity-score matching analysis of 6533 patients from the Herniamed registry

INTRODUCTION

Surgical treatment of type I hiatal sliding hernias aims to control the gastroesophageal reflux symptoms and prevention of hernia recurrence. Usually, a cruroplasty is performed to narrow the hiatal orifice. Here, it remains controversial if a mesh reinforcement of the cruroplasty should be performed, since benefits as well as mesh-associated complications have been described.

METHODS

We performed a propensity-score matching analysis with data derived from the Herniamed registry comparing patients undergoing laparoscopic type I hiatal hernia repair with and without synthetic mesh. We analyzed perioperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data including data derived from the 1-year follow-up in the registry.

RESULTS

6.533 patients with an axial, type I hiatal hernia and gastroesophageal reflux are included in this analysis. Mesh augmentation of the hiatoplasty was performed in n = 1.252/6.533 (19.2%) of patients. The defect size in the subgroup of patients with mesh augmentation was with mean 16.3 cm2 [14.5; 18.2] significantly larger as in the subgroups without mesh augmentation with 10.8 cm2 [8.7; 12.9]; (p < 0.001). In patients with mesh hiatoplasty n = 479 (38.3%) Nissen and n = 773 (61.7%) Toupet fundoplications are performed. 1.207 matched pairs could be analyzed. The mean defect size after matching was with 15.9 cm2 comparable in both groups. A significant association was seen regarding recurrence (4.72% mesh vs. 7.29% non-mesh hiatoplasty, p = 0.012). The same relation can be seen for pain on exertion (8.78% vs 12.10%; p = 0.014) and pain requiring treatment (6.13% vs 9.11%; p = 0.010). All other outcome parameter showed no significant correlation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrate that mesh-reinforced laparoscopic type I hiatal hernia repair in larger defects is associated with significantly lower rates for recurrence, pain on exertion and pain requiring treatment.

Medium term (> 12 months) outcomes after laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair without conventional fundoplication using PH4B-mesh implant (Phasix™) in 176 reflux patients: experience and technique

BACKGROUND

Hiatal mesh repair remains a controversial topic among anti-reflux surgeons. Biosynthetic mesh cruroplasty may prevent early recurrence while avoiding late esophageal erosion and strictures associated with non-resorbable materials. So far, medium-term results on hiatal PH4B (Poly-4-Hydroxybutyrate) mesh repair from high-volume centers are lacking.

METHODS

We analyzed the medium-term efficacy and safety of PH4B mesh cruroplasty in 176 consecutive patients (≥ 18 years) with symptomatic hiatal hernias. Treatment failure was defined as the clinical recurrence of reflux symptoms. Patients could choose between mesh augmented hiatal repair (combined with a modified anterior hemifundoplication and fundophrenicopexy), Nissen fundoplication, and magnetic sphincter augmentation at their discretion. We also describe the surgical approach to mesh augmented hiatal repair used at our center.

RESULTS

On average, patients were 55 (± 14) years old and followed up for 22 (± 7; sum: 3931) months. Treatment failed in 6/176 (3%, 95% CI: 2-7%) patients. The 24-month Kaplan-Meier failure estimate was 2.8% (95% CI: 0.4-5%). Each centimeter in hernia size increased the risk of failure by 52% (p = 0.02). Heavier patients (BMI > 27) had an 11% higher probability of clinical symptom recurrence (p = 0.03). The dysphagia and bloating/gas rate were 13/176 (7%), each. 8 (5%) patients required endoscopy due to dysphagia but without intervention. No serious complications, including mesh infection and erosion, or fatalities, occurred.

CONCLUSION

Augmented PH4B mesh cruroplasty without conventional fundoplication shows excellent intermediate-term results in patients with reflux disease due to hiatal hernia. Around one in thirty patients experience treatment failure within 2 years of surgery. Hernia size and overweight are key determinants of treatment failure.

IDEAL Phase 2a Results: Posterior Rectus Sheath Flap for Hiatal Augmentation in Complex Paraesophageal Hernias

OBJECTIVE

To report the developmental phase results of posterior rectus sheath hiatal flap augmentation (PoRSHA), a promising surgical innovation for large and recurrent paraesophageal hernias.

BACKGROUND

Durable hernia repair for large paraesophageal hernias continues to be a surgical challenge. PoRSHA addresses the challenges of current and historical approaches to complex paraesophageal hernias and demonstrates significant promise as a successful alternative approach.

METHODS

Using the IDEAL framework, we outline the technical modifications made over the first 27 consecutive cases using PoRSHA. Outcomes measured included hernia recurrence on routine imaging at 6 months and 2 years, development of a postoperative abdominal wall eventration and incidence of solid food dysphagia.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients at our single institution with type III (n=12), type IV (n=7), or recurrent (n=8) paraesophageal hernias underwent PoRSHA. Surgery was safely and successfully carried out in all cases. Stability of the technique was reached after 16 cases, resulting in 4 main repair types. At an average follow-up of 11 months, we observed no radiologic recurrences, no abdominal eventrations or hernias at the donor site, and 1 patient with occasional solid food dysphagia that resolved with dilation.

CONCLUSIONS

PoRSHA can not only be safely added to conventional hiatal hernia repair with appropriate training but also demonstrates excellent short-term outcomes. While the long-term durability with 5-year follow-up is still needed, here we provide cautious optimism that PoRSHA may represent a novel solution to the long-standing high recurrence rates observed with current complex PEH repair.

Management of symptomatic, asymptomatic, and recurrent hiatal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of hiatal hernia remains controversial. We aimed to compare outcomes of mesh versus no mesh and fundoplication versus no fundoplication in symptomatic patients; surgery versus observation in asymptomatic patients; and redo hernia repair versus conversion to Roux-en-Y reconstruction in recurrent hiatal hernia.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and the ClinicalTrials.gov databases between 2000 and 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, and case series (asymptomatic and recurrent hernias). Screening was performed by two trained independent reviewers. Pooled analyses were performed on comparative data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and Newcastle Ottawa Scale for randomized and non-randomized studies, respectively.

RESULTS

We included 45 studies from 5152 retrieved records. Only six RCTs had low risk of bias. Mesh was associated with a lower recurrence risk (RR = 0.50, 95%CI 0.28, 0.88; I2 = 57%) in observational studies but not RCTs (RR = 0.98, 95%CI 0.47, 2.02; I2 = 34%), and higher total early dysphagia based on five observational studies (RR = 1.44, 95%CI 1.10, 1.89; I2 = 40%) but was not statistically significant in RCTs (RR = 3.00, 95%CI 0.64, 14.16). There was no difference in complications, reintervention, heartburn, reflux, or quality of life. There were no appropriate studies comparing surgery to observation in asymptomatic patients. Fundoplication resulted in higher early dysphagia in both observational studies and RCTs ([RR = 2.08, 95%CI 1.16, 3.76] and [RR = 20.58, 95%CI 1.34, 316.69]) but lower reflux in RCTs (RR = 0.31, 95%CI 0.17, 0.56, I2 = 0%). Conversion to Roux-en-Y was associated with a lower reintervention risk after 30 days compared to redo surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for optimal management of symptomatic and recurrent hiatal hernia remains controversial, underpinned by studies with a high risk of bias. Shared decision making between surgeon and patient is essential for optimal outcomes.

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.

Laparoscopic large hiatus hernia repair with mesh reinforcement versus suture cruroplasty alone: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To compare the difference in outcomes in laparoscopic large hiatus hernia (LHH) repair using suture-based and mesh-based repair techniques.

METHODS

A systematic search of articles was conducted in PubMed, Medline and Embase using the PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing recurrences and reoperations in those patients with large hiatal hernia repair (> 30% stomach in the chest, > 5 cm hiatal defect, hiatal surface area > 10 cm²) who had mesh vs no mesh were assessed quantitatively. The impact of mesh on significant intraoperative/postoperative surgical complications was qualitatively assessed.

RESULTS

Pooled data included six randomized controlled trials and thirteen observational studies with 1670 patients (824 with no mesh, 846 with mesh). There was a significant reduction in the total recurrence rate with mesh (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.25-0.80, p = 0.007). Mesh use did not cause significant reduction in recurrences > 2 cm (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.52-1.67, p = 0.83) or in reoperation rates (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39-1.07, p = 0.09). None of the specific meshes assessed were found to be superior in the reduction of recurrence or reoperation rates. Cases of mesh erosion with eventual foregut resection were noted and were associated with synthetic meshes only.

CONCLUSION

Mesh reinforcement seemed protective against total recurrence in LHH although this has to be interpreted with caution given the level of heterogeneity introduced by the inclusion of observational studies in the analysis. There was no significant reduction in large recurrences (> 2 cm) or reoperation rate. If the synthetic mesh is to be used patients need to be informed of the risk of mesh erosion.

Polypropylene Pelvic Mesh: What Went Wrong and What Will Be of the Future?

Background: Polypropylene (PP) pelvic mesh is a synthetic mesh made of PP polymer used to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Its use has become highly controversial due to reports of serious complications. This research critically reviews the current management options for POP and PP mesh as a viable clinical application for the treatment of POP. The safety and suitability of PP material were rigorously studied and critically evaluated, with consideration to the mechanical and chemical properties of PP. We proposed the ideal properties of the ‘perfect’ synthetic pelvic mesh with emerging advanced materials. Methods: We performed a literature review using PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library (Wiley) databases, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases, including the relevant keywords: pelvic organ prolapse (POP), polypropylene mesh, synthetic mesh, and mesh complications. Results: The results of this review found that although PP is nontoxic, its physical properties demonstrate a significant mismatch between its viscoelastic properties compared to the surrounding tissue, which is a likely cause of complications. In addition, a lack of integration of PP mesh into surrounding tissue over longer periods of follow up is another risk factor for irreversible complications. Conclusions: PP mesh has caused a rise in reports of complications involving chronic pain and mesh exposure. This is due to the mechanical and physicochemical properties of PP mesh. As a result, PP mesh for the treatment of POP has been banned in multiple countries, currently with no alternative available. We propose the development of a pelvic mesh using advanced materials including emerging graphene-based nanocomposite materials.

Surgical treatment of large and complicated hiatal hernias with the new resorbable mesh with hydrogel barrier (Phasix™ ST): a preliminary study

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of the new monofilament fully resorbable mesh with hydrogel barrier (Phasix™ ST), for large and complex hiatal hernia repair. Between December 2017 and December 2020, 60 patients with large or complicated hiatal hernia were treated (40 robotic and 20 laparoscopic procedures). The mesh was placed after primary closure of the hiatal defect, in an onlay fashion around the esophagus, followed by 360^o fundoplication. Follow-up at 3, 6, 12, 18, 24 months from intervention included clinical evaluation and upper GI endoscopy. In cases of recurrence, radiologic survey and manometry were utilized. There were no conversions to open repair or significant postoperative incidents. Over a median follow-up of 21 months (range 3-36), no recurrences or mesh related complications were observed. From our early experience, Phasix™ ST mesh seems to be safe and effective for the reinforcement of crural defects in large and complex hiatal hernia.

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.

Incarcerated Diaphragmatic Hernias After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is one of the most common operations performed for morbid obesity. Some of the known surgical complications include anastomotic leaks and small bowel obstructions due to internal hernias. Diaphragmatic hernias are common in the general population, and repair of symptomatic hernias is generally recommended. Diaphragmatic hernia after a prior LRYGB is markedly less common. Diaphragmatic hernias can occur via a hiatal defect or rarely a parahiatal defect that is found lateral to the hiatus. We present two cases of incarcerated diaphragmatic hernias after a LRYGB with vastly different presentations. The first patient presented with a giant defect containing incarcerated jejunum after a prior LRYGB. The second patient presented with a parahiatal defect with an incarcerated remnant stomach. The first patient was successfully managed laparoscopically by reinforcing the defect with a mesh after defect closure. The second patient required an open operation due to the inability to reduce the tightly incarcerated stomach and defect approximated with sutures without the need for mesh reinforcement. Both patients did well postoperatively and remain symptom-free.

Large hiatus hernia: time for a paradigm shift?

Background

Laparoscopic large hiatal hernia (LHH) repair remains a challenge despite three decades of ongoing attempts at improving surgical outcome. Its rarity and complexity, coupled with suboptimal initial approach that is usually best suited for small symptomatic herniae have contributed to unacceptable higher failure rates.

Results

We have therefore undertaken a systematic appraisal of LHH with a view to clear out our misunderstandings of this entity and to address dogmatic practices that may have contributed to poor outcomes.

Conclusions

First, we propose strict criteria to define nomenclature in LHH and discuss ways of subcategorising them. Next, we discuss preoperative workup strategies, paying particular attention to any relevant often atypical symptoms, indications for surgery, timing of surgery, role of surgery in the elderly and emphasizing the key role of a preoperative CT imaging in evaluating the mediastinum. Some key dissection methods are then discussed with respect to approach to the mediastinal sac, techniques to avoid/deal with pleural breach and rationale to avoid Collis gastroplasty. The issues pertaining to the repair phase are also discussed by evaluating the merits of the cruroplasty, fundoplication types and gastropexy. We end up debating the role of mesh reinforcement and assess the evidence with regards to recurrence, reoperation rate, complications, esophageal dilatation, delayed gastric emptying and mortality. Lastly, we propose a rationale for routine postoperative investigations.

Safety and efficacy of absorbable and non-absorbable fixation systems for intraperitoneal mesh fixation: an experimental study in swine

PURPOSE

Choice of the best possible fixation system in terms of safety and effectiveness for intraperitoneal mesh placement in hernia surgery remains controversial. The aim of the present study was to compare the performance of four fixation systems in a swine model of intraperitoneal mesh fixation.

METHODS

Fourteen Landrace swine were utilized in the study. The experiment included two stages. Initially, four pieces of mesh (Ventralight ™ ST) sizing 10 × 5 cm were placed and fixed intraperitoneally to reinforce 4 small full thickness abdominal wall defects created with diathermy. These defects were repaired primarily with absorbable suture before mesh implantation. Each mesh was anchored with a different tack device between Absorbatack™, Protack™, Capsure™, or Optifix™. The second stage took place after 60 days and included euthanasia, laparoscopy, and laparotomy via U-shaped incision to obtain the measurements for the outcome parameters. The primary endpoint of the study was to compare the peel strength of the compound tack/mesh from the abdominal wall. Secondary parameters were the extent and quality of visceral adhesions to the mesh, the degree of mesh shrinkage and the histological response around the tacks.

RESULTS

Thirteen out of 14 animals survived the experiment and 10 were included in the final analysis. Capsure™ tacks had higher peel strength when compared to Absorbatack™ (p = 0.028); Protack™ (p = 0.043); and Optifix™ (p = 0.009). No significant differences were noted regarding the extent of visceral adhesions (Friedman's test p value 0.854), the adhesion quality (Friedman's test p value 0.506), or the mesh shrinkage (Friedman's test p value = 0.827). Four out of the ten animals developed no adhesions at all 2 months after implantation.

CONCLUSION

Capsure™ fixation system provided higher peel strength that the other tested devices in our swine model of intraperitoneal mesh fixation. Our findings generate the hypothesis that this type of fixation may be superior in a clinical setting. Clinical trials with long-term follow-up are required to assess the safety and efficacy of mesh fixation systems in hernia surgery.

Post-operative gastric outlet obstruction of giant hiatal hernia repair: a case report

Background

Giant hiatal hernia is defined as those with more than 30% of the stomach herniating into the chest cavity. The transabdominal laparoscopic approach is the well-established repair form for giant hiatal hernia. To our best knowledge, reports on post-operative gastric outlet obstruction of giant hiatal hernia repair have been scanty up till now.

Case presentation

A 45-year-old female patient was referred to the Emergency Department of our hospital with a chief complaint of acute right epigastric pain for 2 days. Physical examination revealed mild tenderness in the right epigastrium, without rebound tenderness or guarding. The abdominal computed tomography scan revealed a large low-density gastric artifact in the lower mediastinum—giant hiatal hernia. The barium swallow esophagogram and gastroscopy also confirmed the presence of a giant hiatal hernia. A transabdominal laparoscopic operation for reduction of the hernia contents and repair of the hiatal defect was performed. Her right epigastric pain alleviated obviously on the first postoperative day. On post-operative day five, however, she was presented with nausea and vomiting independent of meals. The nasogastric tube was inserted and kept in the stomach for 7 days. After removing the nasogastric tube, severe nausea and vomiting of the patient occurred again. Barium swallow revealed gastroptosis and enfoldment in the duodenal bulb, which indicated the presence of gastric outlet obstruction. Gastrojejunostomy was performed for her to relieve the gastric outlet obstruction. The patient was discharged on the tenth day after the second operation without any discomfort. During the regular follow-up period, she felt well and was satisfied with her status.

Conclusions

Facing the giant hiatal hernia repair, the reduction of the hernia contents and repair of the hiatal defect being well operated on are insufficient, and we must watch out the anatomical variation, like the deviation of partial intra-abdominal organs from their normal positions, as well as paying attention to the protection of abdominal vagal nerve during the operation. Post-operative gastric outlet obstruction of giant hiatal hernia repair is rare, while gastrojejunostomy can successfully relieve the gastric outlet obstruction.

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.

A Systematic Review Examining the Experimental Methodology Behind In Vivo Testing of Hiatus Hernia and Diaphragmatic Hernia Mesh

INTRODUCTION

Mesh implants are regularly used to help repair both hiatus hernias (HH) and diaphragmatic hernias (DH). In vivo studies are used to test not only mesh safety, but increasingly comparative efficacy. Our work examines the field of in vivo mesh testing for HH and DH models to establish current practices and standards.

METHOD

This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO. Medline and Embase databases were searched for relevant in vivo studies. Forty-four articles were identified and underwent abstract review, where 22 were excluded. Four further studies were excluded after full-text review-leaving 18 to undergo data extraction.

RESULTS

Of 18 studies identified, 9 used an in vivo HH model and 9 a DH model. Five studies undertook mechanical testing on tissue samples-all uniaxial in nature. Testing strip widths ranged from 1-20 mm (median 3 mm). Testing speeds varied from 1.5-60 mm/minute. Upon histology, the most commonly assessed structural and cellular factors were neovascularisation and macrophages respectively (n = 9 each). Structural analysis was mostly qualitative, where cellular analysis was equally likely to be quantitative. Eleven studies assessed adhesion formation, of which 8 used one of four scoring systems. Eight studies measured mesh shrinkage.

DISCUSSION

In vivo studies assessing mesh for HH and DH repair are uncommon. Within this relatively young field, we encourage surgical and materials testing institutions to discuss its standardisation.

Laparoscopic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair: To Mesh or not to Mesh. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare outcomes after laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair (LPEHR) with mesh or primary repair alone.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

High recurrence rates after LPEHR have been reported. Whether the use of mesh improves outcomes remains elusive.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LPEHR with mesh repair versus suture repair alone. Early (≤6 months) and late (>6 months) recurrence rates were used as primary endpoints to assess efficacy. Intraoperative complications, overall morbidity, and reoperation rates were used as secondary endpoints to assess safety. A meta-analysis was conducted using relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the analyzed outcomes.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs comparing mesh (n = 383) versus suture only (n = 352) repair were included for analysis. Patients undergoing LPEHR with mesh reinforcement had similar early (RR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.26-2.07, P = 0.46) and late (RR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.27-2.08, P = 0.48) recurrence rates as those with primary repair. Similar recurrence rates were also found when stratifying the analysis by the type of mesh utilized (absorbable and nonabsorbable). Intraoperative complications (RR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.33-3.28, P = 0.92) and reoperation rates (RR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.29-1.92, P = 0.45) were also similar in both groups. Overall morbidity, however, was higher after mesh repair with nonabsorbable mesh (RR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.24-1.71, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing LPEHR have similar early and late recurrence rates with either mesh reinforcement or suture only repair, regardless of the type of mesh utilized. Overall morbidity, however, seems to be higher in patients repaired with nonabsorbable mesh.

Prosthetic Reinforcement in Hiatal Hernia Repair, Does Mesh Material Matter? A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: Hiatal hernia repair (HHR) is a complex surgical procedure and its management is not standardized. Several meta-analyses have compared cruroplasty with hiatus reinforcement with mesh, and crura augmentation appears to have better outcomes. However, heterogeneity in type of mesh and placement techniques has differed significantly. Materials and Methods: A systematic review and network meta-analysis were carried out. An electronic systematic research was carried out throughout Pubmed, CENTRAL, and Web of Science, of articles analyzing HHR with cruroplasty, nonabsorbable mesh (NAM), and absorbable mesh (AM) reinforcement. Results: Seventeen articles based on 1857 patients were enrolled in this article. The point estimation showed that when compared against the control group (NAM), the HH recurrence risk in AM and cruroplasty group was higher (relative ratio [RR] 2.3; CrI 0.8-6.3, RR 3.6; CrI 2.0-8.3, respectively). Postoperative complication rates were alike in all groups. The prevalence of mesh erosion after HHR is low. Conclusions: This network meta-analysis showed that prosthetic reinforcement significantly reduced HH recurrence when compared with cruroplasty alone. However, there is not enough evidence to compare different mesh compositions.

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.

Use of Polypropylene Strips for Reinforcement of the Cruroplasty in Laparoscopic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair: A Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair is an effective treatment for symptomatic paraesophageal hernias. To reduce recurrence rates, the use of prosthetics for the crural repair has been suggested. Mesh-related complications are rare but known to be disastrous. To address another form of crural repair, polypropylene strips are suggested. This study aimed to assess peri- and postoperative complications of reinforcement of cruroplasty with polypropylene strips.

METHODS

From 2013 to 2020, patients with a primary or recurrent type 2, 3, or 4 paraesophageal hernia that underwent cruroplasty with polypropylene strips were retrospectively reviewed. Intra- and postoperative complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. The incidence of symptomatic recurrent hiatal hernia (CT or endoscopy proven) and hospital stay were assessed.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-eight patients were included. Mean age was 65 years (standard deviation 10.4), and 119 patients were female (75.3%). Almost 50% of surgeries took place between 2018 and 2020. Median follow-up was 7 months (interquartile range 17.5). Mean operation time in the primary hernia group was 159 min (standard deviation 39.0), and length of stay was 4.4 days. In 3/158 patients (2.0%), intraoperative complications occurred. Two patients developed a grade 4 and seven patients a grade 3 postoperative complication. No mortality was recorded. Twelve recurrences (8.2%) were detected in the primary hernia group and one (9.1%) in the recurrent hernia group.

CONCLUSION

There were no mesh-related complications seen and symptomatic recurrence rate was low, but longer follow-up is needed.

The use of biosynthetic mesh in giant hiatal hernia repair: is there a rationale? A 3-year single-center experience

PURPOSE

Reinforced prosthetic crural repair is particularly indicated for giant hiatal hernias. The rationale is to reduce the recurrence rate in the long term. The aim of our study is to evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic giant hiatal hernia repair using a biosynthetic mesh.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 44 patients who underwent laparoscopic mesh-reinforced hiatal closure and fundoplication using a biosynthetic material. Inclusion criterion was large hiatal defects (> 5 cm). Follow-up was scheduled at 6, 12 and 36 months after surgery.

RESULTS

44 patients (29F) with a mean age of 62 years (range 14-85) and mean of BMI 24.5 kg/m² (range 21-29) underwent successful laparoscopic repair. Twenty-six (59.1%) patients had Nissen-Rossetti fundoplication, whereas 18 (40.9%) had Toupet fundoplication. Six-month questionnaire for the evaluation of symptoms was available for 43 patients (97.7%) and for 40 (90.9%) patients at 12 and 36 months. Mean preoperative symptoms score analysis was 1.68 ± 0.73. Mean scores at each follow-up time were significantly improved compared to baseline (p > 0.05). Barium swallow was available in 37 patients (84.1%) at 1 year after surgery. Radiologic recurrence was observed in two patients (4.5%). No patient had symptoms attributable to recurrence or required revisional surgery. There were no mesh-related complications at 3 years follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of biosynthetic mesh for crural reinforcement is associated with a low incidence of mesh-related complications and with a reasonably low recurrence rate (4.5%) at 36 months. However, additional data with longer follow-up are needed to determine long-term safety and efficacy.

Evolution From the U-shaped to Keyhole-shaped Mesh Configuration in the Repair of Paraesophageal and Recurrent Hiatal Hernia

BACKGROUND

Paraesophageal hernia (PEH) and recurrent hiatal hernia (RHH) are prone to recurrences. One adjunct used to reduce recurrences is mesh reinforcement. The optimal configuration is yet to be determined. We present our evolution from the U-shaped to the keyhole pattern.

METHODS

All patients undergoing PEH/RHH repair with mesh between 2013 and 2019 were reviewed for demographic information, perioperative/intraoperative details, postoperative complications, and recurrences.

RESULTS

Of patients undergoing PEH/RHH repair between 2013 and 2019, 138 were repaired using mesh. Of these, 88 were repaired using the U-shaped configuration and 50 using the keyhole configuration. The U-shaped configuration was used for PEH in 72% and RHH in 28%, while the keyhole configuration was used for PEH in 66% and RHH in 34%. Thirty patients suffered postoperative complications, although there was no difference between the groups. Overall, 28 patients in the U-shaped configuration group (31.8%) had a recurrence of their hiatal hernia identified, compared with 7 patients (14.6%) in the keyhole group (P=0.039). The median time to last follow-up was 21 months (range: 1 to 85) in the U-shaped group and 8 months (range: 1 to 23) in the keyhole group. There was no difference in median time to recurrence, postoperative dysphagia, dilations, or strictures.

CONCLUSIONS

The keyhole pattern mesh was not associated with a higher complication rate compared with the U-shape pattern. Although this study was not a direct comparison between the configurations, it does suggest that the keyhole pattern may lead to fewer recurrences.

Safety and Efficacy of Crura Augmentation with Phasix ST Mesh for Large Hiatal Hernia: 3-Year Single-Center Experience

Background: Safety and effectiveness of absorbable meshes for laparoscopic hiatus hernia repair are still debated. This may be due to patient selection, technique of repair, type and shape of mesh, definition of recurrent hernia, and length of follow-up. The aim of this study was to assess safety, short-term efficacy, and quality of life after laparoscopic repair of hiatal hernia reinforced with a biosynthetic absorbable mesh. Materials and Methods: A single-center observational cohort study was conducted in patients with large type III-IV hiatal hernia who underwent laparoscopic crural repair reinforced with Phasix ST^®, a monofilament resorbable mesh (poly-4-hydroxybuterate) with a hydrogel barrier on one side. Patient data were extracted from hospital charts and a prospectively updated research database. Both generic Short Form-36 (SF-36) and disease-specific (Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease Health-Related Quality of Life [GERD-HRQL]) questionnaires were used to assess preoperative and postoperative quality of life. Results: From January 2017 to July 2019, 73 consecutive patients were implanted with Phasix ST mesh. The median follow-up was 17 (interquartile range 9-24) months. Recurrent hernia was found in 2 of 62 (3.2%) patients followed for more than 6 months after surgery, but none required reoperation. The overall postoperative morbidity rate was 8.2%. No mesh-related complications occurred. Compared to baseline, there was a statistically significant improvement of all items of the SF-36 questionnaire (P < .001) and of the median GERD-HRQL score (P < .001). Conclusion: The use of Phasix ST mesh to reinforce crural repair for large hiatus hernias is safe, is effective in the short-term follow-up, and is associated to improved quality of life.