Long-Term Outcomes Following Laparoscopic Repair of Large Hiatus Hernias Performed by Trainees Versus Consultant Surgeons

Development of the ParaOesophageal hernia SympTom (POST) tool

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to develop a symptom severity instrument (ParaOesophageal hernia SympTom (POST) tool) specific to para-oesophageal hernia (POH).

METHODS

The POST tool was developed in four stages. The first was establishment of a Steering Committee. In the second stage, items were generated through a systematic review and online scoping survey of international experts. In the third stage, a three-round modified Delphi consensus process was conducted with a group of international experts who were asked to rate the importance of candidate items. An a priori threshold for inclusion was set at 80 per cent. The modified Delphi process culminated in a consensus meeting to develop the first iteration of the tool. In the final stage, two international patient workshops were held to assess the content validity and acceptability of the POST tool.

RESULTS

The systematic review and scoping survey generated 64 symptoms, refined to 20 for inclusion in the modified Delphi consensus process. Twenty-six global experts participated in the Delphi consensus process. Five symptoms reached consensus across two rounds: difficulty getting solid foods down, chest pain after meals, difficulty getting liquids down, shortness of breath only after meals, and an early feeling of fullness after eating. The subsequent patient workshops deemed these five symptoms to be relevant and suggested that reflux should be included; these were taken forward to create the final POST tool.

CONCLUSION

The POST tool is the first instrument designed to capture POH-specific symptoms. It will allow clinicians to standardize reporting of symptoms of POH and evaluate the response to surgical intervention.

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.