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

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.

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.

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.

LAPAROSCOPIC ANTIREFLUX SURGERY: ARE OLD QUESTIONS ANSWERED? MESH HERNIOPLASTY

Hiatal hernias are at high risk of recurrence. Mesh reinforcement after primary approximation of the hiatal crura has been advocated to reduce this risk of recurrence, analogous to mesh repair of abdominal wall hernias. However, the results of such repairs have been mixed, at best. In addition, repairs using some type of mesh have led to significant complications, such as erosion and esophageal stricture. At present, there is no consensus as to (1) whether mesh should be used, (2) indications for use, (3) the type of mesh, and (4) in what configuration. This lack of consensus is likely secondary to the notion that recurrence occurs at the site of crural approximation. We have explored the theory that many, if not most, "recurrences" occur in the anterior and left lateral aspects of the hiatus, normally where the mesh is not placed. We theorized that "recurrence" actually represents progression of the hernia, rather than a true recurrence. This has led to our development of a new mesh configuration to enhance the tensile strength of the hiatus and counteract continued stresses from intra-abdominal pressure.

What works best in hiatus hernia repair, sutures alone, absorbable mesh or non-absorbable mesh? A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair (HHR) and fundoplication is a common low risk procedure providing excellent control of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and restoring of normal anatomy at the hiatus. HHR may fail, however, resulting in hiatus hernia (HH) recurrence, and the use of tension-free mesh-augmented hernioplasty has been proposed to reduce recurrence. Previous research on this topic has been heterogeneous, including study methods, mesh type used and technique performed. A systematic review and network meta-analysis were carried out. An electronic systematic research was carried out using 'PUBMED', 'EMBASE', 'Medline (OVID)' and 'Web of Science', of articles identifying HHR with suture cruroplasty, non-absorbable mesh (NAM) and absorbable mesh (AM) reinforcement. Eight RCTs with 766 patients were evaluated. NAM had significantly (P < 0.05) lower early recurrence rates (OR: 0.225, 95% CI 0.0342, 0.871) compared with suture repair alone; however, no differences in late recurrences were evident. For AM, no difference in early (0.508, 95% CI 0.0605, 4.81) or late (1.07. 95% CI 0.116, 11.4) recurrence rates were evident compared with the suture only group. Major complication rates were similar in all groups. NAM reinforcement significantly reduced early HH recurrence when compared with sutured cruroplasty alone; however, late recurrence rates were similar with all techniques. Given the limited data in comparing AM with NAM, this study was unable to conclude which composition was significant. We emphasize caution when interpreting small sample size RCTs, and recommend more research with larger randomized studies.

Mesh Versus No Mesh for Cruroplasty

This review describes the evolution of hiatal hernia repair for the past several decades: From the use of a primary tissue repair only, the subsequent inclusion of synthetic mesh and its complications, to current day indications for mesh use. We will highlight the recent research in biologic and composite meshes as well as the ongoing limitations in studying their efficacy. Finally, we will describe our institutional indications and surgical technique practices in the utilization of biologic mesh.

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.