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

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.

Optimizing outcomes in paraesophageal hernia repair: a novel critical view

BACKGROUND

The recurrence rate of paraesophageal hernia repair (PEHR) is high with reported rates of recurrence varying between 25 and 42%. We present a novel approach to PEHR that involves the visualization of a critical view to decrease recurrence rate. Our study aims to investigate the outcomes of PEHR following the implementation of a critical view.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective study that examines operative outcomes in patients who underwent PEHR with a critical view in comparison to patients who underwent standard repair. The critical view is defined as full dissection of the posterior mediastinum with complete mobilization of the esophagus to the level of the inferior pulmonary vein, visualization of the left crus of the diaphragm as well as the left gastric artery while the distal esophagus is retracted to expose the spleen in the background. Bivariate chi-squared analysis and multivariable logistic and linear regressions were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 297 patients underwent PEHR between 2015 and 2023, including 207 with critical view and 90 with standard repair which represents the historic control. Type III hernias were most common (48%) followed by type I (36%), type IV (13%), and type II (2.0%). Robotic-assisted repair was most common (65%), followed by laparoscopic (22%) and open repair (14%). Fundoplications performed included Dor (59%), Nissen (14%), Belsey (5%), and Toupet (2%). Patients who underwent PEHR with critical view had lower hernia recurrence rates compared to standard (9.7% vs 20%, P < .01) and lower reoperation rates (0.5% vs 10%, P < .001). There were no differences in postoperative complications on unadjusted bivariate analysis; however, adjusted outcomes revealed a lower odds of postoperative complications in patients with critical view (AOR .13, 95% CI .05-.31, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

We present dissection of a novel critical view during repair of all types of paraesophageal hernia that results in reproducible, consistent, and durable postoperative outcomes, including a significant reduction in recurrence and reoperation.

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.

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.