Sutured Versus Mesh-augmented Hiatus Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Comparative analysis of robotic and laparoscopic techniques in hiatal hernia and crural repair: a review of current evidence and outcomes

PURPOSE

The purpose of this narrative review is to evaluate the implementation of robotic surgery in hiatal hernia and crural repair, based on the existing literature and to compare this approach to other established techniques.

METHODS

We performed a non- systematic literature search of PubMed and MEDLINE on February 25, 2024 for papers published to date focusing on the surgical repair of hiatal hernias using the robotic platform. After eliminating publications based on eligibility criteria, 13 studies were selected for analysis.

RESULTS

Robotic surgery is increasingly utilized in hiatal hernia repair due to its enhanced ergonomics and superior visualization capabilities. Operative times vary, with some studies indicating longer durations for robotic surgery (e.g., Giovannetti et al. demonstrated median operative time of 196 min for robotic compared to 145 min for laparoscopic) while others report shorter times (e.g., Lang F et al. demonstrated 88 min for robotic versus 102 min for laparoscopic). Recurrence rates between robotic and laparoscopic repairs are comparable, with reported recurrence rates of 1.8% for robotic and 1.2% for laparoscopic approaches by Benedix et al. Robotic surgery offers potential advantages, including reduced intraoperative blood loss (e.g., Giovannetti et al. mentioned median blood loss of 20 ml for robotic versus 50 ml for laparoscopic). The length of hospital stay and postoperative complication rates also vary, with some studies suggesting shorter stays and fewer complications for robotic surgery as surgeons become more proficient. Soliman et al. reported a statistically significant reduction in complication rates with robotic surgery (6.3% versus 19.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery presents promising results regarding the length of hospital stay, conversion rate to open surgery and postoperative complication rates when compared to laparoscopy based on the existing literature. Despite the lack of striking differences, robotic hiatal hernia repair is a valid and evolving approach.

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.

Quality of life following repair of large hiatal hernia is not influenced by the use of mesh-Longer-term follow-up from a randomized trial

INTRODUCTION

The use of prosthetic mesh in laparoscopic repair of large hiatus hernias remains controversial. Clinical and quality of life outcomes from a randomized controlled trial of mesh versus suture repair previously showed few differences at early follow-up. This study evaluated longer-term quality of life outcomes from that trial.

METHODS

A prospective, multicentre, double blind randomized controlled trial assessed three methods of repair for large hiatus hernias: sutures-only versus absorbable mesh versus non-absorbable mesh. Quality of life was assessed using the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire which was completed preoperatively and then at 3, 6, 12 months following surgery and annually thereafter. SF-36 outcomes were compared across the three repair techniques at longer-term follow-up (3-6 years), and to earlier baseline and 12-month outcomes.

RESULTS

126 patients were randomized; 43-suture-only, 41-absorbable mesh and 42-non-absorbable mesh. Questionnaires were completed by 118 patients preoperatively, 115 at 12 months and 98 at longer-term follow-up (median 5 years). There were no significant differences between the repair techniques for the subscale and composite scores at longer-term follow-up. The mental component score improved significantly after surgery and was sustained across follow-up for all techniques. The physical component score also improved significantly but was lower at longer-term follow-up compared to the 12-month follow up in both mesh groups.

CONCLUSION

Surgical repair of large hiatus hernias provides sustained long-term improvement in quality of life. The addition of mesh does not improve quality of life.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered with the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12605000725662.

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.

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.

A trans-Canadian positive deviance seminar for paraesophageal hernia surgery: Reporting national postoperative outcomes and consensus recommendations

BACKGROUND

The incidence of adverse events (AEs) and length of stay (LOS) varies significantly following paraesophageal hernia surgery. We performed a Canadian multicenter positive deviance (PD) seminar to review individual center and national level data and establish holistic perioperative practice recommendations.

METHODS

A national virtual PD seminar was performed in October 2021. Recent best evidence focusing on AEs and LOS was presented. Subsequently, anonymized center-level AE and LOS data collected between 01/2017 and 01/2021 from a prospective, web-based database that tracks postoperative outcomes was presented. The top two performing centers with regards to these metrics were chosen and surgeons from these hospitals discussed elements of their treatment pathways that contributed to these outcomes. Consensus recommendations were then identified with participants independently rating their level of agreement.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight surgeons form 8 centers took part in the seminar across 5 Canadian provinces. Of the 680 included patients included, Clavien-Dindo grade I and II/III/IV/V complications occurred in 121/39/12/2 patients (17.8%/5.7%/1.8%/0.3%). Respiratory complications were the most common (effusion 12/680, 1.7% and pneumonia 9/680, 1.3%). Esophageal and gastric perforation occurred in 7 and 4/680, (1.0% and 0.6% respectively). Median LOS varied significantly between institutions (1 day, range 1-3 vs. 7 days, 3-8, p < 0.001). A strong level of agreement was achieved for 10/12 of the consensus statements generated.

CONCLUSION

PD seminars provide a supportive forum for centers to review best evidence and experience and generate recommendations based on expert opinion. Further research is ongoing to determine if this approach effectively accomplishes this objective.

Hiatal Hernia Repair With Tension-Free Mesh or Crural Sutures Alone in Antireflux Surgery: A 13-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Antireflux surgery is an effective treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but the durability of concomitant hiatal hernia repair remains challenging. Previous research reported that the use of a mesh-reinforced, tension-free technique was associated with more dysphagia for solid foods after 3 years without reducing hiatal hernia recurrence rates compared with crural sutures alone, but the long-term effects of this technique have not been assessed.

Objective

To assess the long-term anatomical and functional outcomes of using a mesh for hiatal hernia repair in patients with GERD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A double-blind, randomized clinical trial was performed at a single center (Ersta Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden) from January 11, 2006, to December 1, 2010. A total of 159 patients were recruited and randomly assigned. Data for the current analysis were collected from September 1, 2021, to March 31, 2022. All analyses were conducted with the intention-to-treat population.

Interventions

Closure of the diaphragmatic hiatus with crural sutures alone vs a tension-free technique using a nonabsorbable polytetrafluoroethylene mesh (Bard CruraSoft).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was radiologically verified recurrent hiatal hernia after more than 10 years. Secondary outcomes were dysphagia scores (ranging from 1 to 4, with 1 indicating no episodes of dysphagia and 4 indicating more than 3 episodes of dysphagia per day) for solid and liquid foods, generic 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and disease-specific Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale symptom assessment scores, proton pump inhibitor consumption, and reoperation rates. Intergroup comparisons of parametric data were performed using t tests; for nonparametric data, Mann-Whitney U, χ2, or Fisher exact tests were used. For intragroup comparisons vs the baseline at follow-up times, the Friedman test was used, and post hoc analysis was performed using Wilcoxon matched pairs.

Results

Of 145 available patients, follow-up data were obtained from 103 (response rate 71%; mean [SD] age at follow-up, 65 [11.3] years; 55 [53%] female), with 53 initially randomly assigned to mesh reinforcement, and 50 to crural suture alone. The mean (SD) follow-up time was 13 (1.1) years. The verified radiologic hiatal hernia recurrence rates were 11 of 29 (38%) in the mesh group vs 11 of 35 (31%) in the suture group (P = .61). However, 13 years postoperatively, mean (SD) dysphagia scores for solids remained significantly higher in the mesh group (mean [SD], 1.9 [0.7] vs 1.6 [0.9]; P = .01).

Conclusions and Relevance

Findings from this long-term follow-up of a randomized clinical trial suggest that tension-free crural repair with nonabsorbable mesh does not reduce the incidence of hiatal hernia recurrence 13 years postoperatively. This finding combined with maintained higher dysphagia scores does not support the routine use of tension-free polytetrafluoroethylene mesh closure in laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair for treatment of GERD.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05069493.

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.

Recurrence in Paraesophageal Hernia: Patient Factors and Composite Surgical Repair in 862 Cases

BACKGROUND

Repair of giant paraesophageal hernia (PEH) is associated with a considerable hernia recurrence rate by objective measures. This study analyzed a large series of laparoscopic giant PEH repair to determine factors associated with anatomical recurrence.

METHOD

Data was extracted from a single-surgeon prospective database of laparoscopic repair of giant PEH from 1991 to 2021. Upper endoscopy was performed within 12 months postoperatively and selectively thereafter. Any supra-diaphragmatic stomach was defined as anatomical recurrence. Patient and hernia characteristics and technical operative factors, including "composite repair" (360° fundoplication with esophagopexy and cardiopexy to right crus), were evaluated with univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic primary repair was performed in 862 patients. The anatomical recurrence rate was 27.3% with median follow-up of 33 months (IQR 16, 68). Recurrence was symptomatic in 45% of cases and 29% of these underwent a revision operation. Hernia recurrence was associated with younger age, adversely affected quality of life, and were associated with non-composite repair. Multivariate analysis identified age < 70 years, presence of Barrett's esophagus, absence of "composite repair", and hiatus closure under tension as independent factors associated with recurrence (HR 1.27, 95%CI 0.88-1.82, p = 0.01; HR 1.58, 95%CI 1.12-2.23, p = 0.009; HR 1.72, 95%CI 1.2-2.44, p = 0.002; HR 2.05, 95%CI 1.33-3.17, p = 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Repair of giant PEH is associated with substantial anatomical recurrence associated with patient and technique factors. Patient factors included age < 70 years, Barrett's esophagus, and hiatus tension. "Composite repair" was associated with lower recurrence rate.

Trends in outcomes of 862 giant hiatus hernia repairs over 30 years

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic giant hiatus hernia repair is technically difficult with ongoing debate regarding the most effective surgical technique. Repair of small hernia has been well described but data for giant hernia is variable. This study evaluated trends in outcomes of laparoscopic non-mesh repair of giant paraesophageal hernia (PEH) over 30 years.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a single-surgeon prospective database. Laparoscopic non-mesh repairs for giant PEH between 1991 and 2021 included. Three-hundred-sixty-degree fundoplication was performed routinely, evolving into "composite repair" (esophagopexy and cardiopexy to the right crus). Cases were chronologically divided into tertiles based on operation date (Group 1, 1991-2002; Group 2, 2003-2012; Group 3, 2012-2021) with trends in casemix, operative factors and outcomes evaluated. Hernia recurrence was plotted using weighted moving average and cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis.

RESULTS

862 giant PEH repairs met selection criteria. There was an increasing proportion of "composite repair" after the first decade (Group 1, 2.7%; Group 2, 81.9%; Group 3, 100%; p < 0.001). There were less anatomical hernia recurrence (Group 1, 36.6%; Group 2, 22.9%; Group 3, 22.7%; p < 0.001) and symptomatic recurrence (Group 1, 34.2%; Group 2, 21.9%; Group 3, 7%; p < 0.001) over time. The incidence of anatomical recurrence declined over time, decreasing from 30.8% and plateauing below 17.6% near the study's end. Median followup (months) in the first decade was higher but followup between the latter two decades comparable (Group 1, 49 [IQR 20, 81]; Group 2, 30 [IQR 15, 65]; Group 3, 24 [14, 56]; p < 0.001). There were 10 (1.2%) Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complications including two perioperative deaths (0.2%).

CONCLUSION

Hernia recurrence rates decreased with increasing case volume. This coincided with the increasing adoption of "composite repair", supporting the possible improvement in recurrence rates with this approach.

The value of "diaphragmatic relaxing incision" for the durability of the crural repair in patients with paraesophageal hernia: a double blind randomized clinical trial

Background

Surgical repair of paraesophageal hernias (PEHs) is burdened with high recurrence rates, and hitherto various techniques explored to enforce the traditional crural repair have not been successful. The hiatal reconstruction in PEH is exposed to significant tension, which may be minimized by adding a diaphragmatic relaxing incision to enhance the durability of the crural repair.

Patients and methods

All individuals undergoing elective laparoscopic repair of a large PEH, irrespective of age, were considered eligible. PEHs were classified into types II-IV. The preoperative work-up program included multidetector computed tomography and symptom assessment questionnaires, which will be repeated during the postoperative follow-up. Patients were randomly divided into a control group with crural repair alone and an intervention group with the addition of a left-sided diaphragmatic relaxing incision at the edge of the upper pole of the spleen. The diaphragmatic defect was then covered by a synthetic mesh.

Results

The primary endpoint of this trial was the rate of anatomical PEH recurrence at 1 year. Secondary endpoints included symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease, dysphagia, odynophagia, gas bloat, regurgitation, chest pain, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, postprandial pain, cardiovascular and pulmonary symptoms, and patient satisfaction in the immediate postoperative course (3 months) and at 1 year. Postoperative complications, morbidity, and disease burden were recorded for each patient. This was a double-blind study, meaning that the operation report was filed in a locked archive to keep the patient, staff, and clinical assessors blinded to the study group allocation. Blinding must not be broken during the follow-up unless required by any emergencies in the clinical management of the patient. Likewise, the patients must not be informed about the details of the operation.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identification number NCT04179578.

Pre-existing hiatal mesh increases morbidity during and after revisional antireflux surgery: A retrospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Revisional antireflux surgery, including hiatus hernia repair, is increasingly common. Mesh-augmented hiatal closure at the time of index operation is controversial but commonly performed. Although a meta-analysis of randomized data has demonstrated no additional benefit of routine mesh placement, it is unclear whether this practice results in harm, particularly at the time of revisional antireflux surgery. We determined whether pre-existing mesh at the hiatus increases morbidity during and after revisional antireflux surgery.

METHODS

Analysis of prospectively-maintained databases of all elective revisional antireflux surgery cases in 36 hospitals across Australia took place over 10 years. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of patients with and without prior hiatal mesh were compared. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to validate primary findings.

RESULTS

A total of 346 revisional cases (35 with pre-existing mesh) were analyzed. The 2 groups had comparable baseline characteristics. In total, 77 (22.2%) patients had 148 intraoperative adverse events. Pre-existing mesh was associated with a higher risk of intraoperative complications (48.6% vs 22.5%, odds ratio 3.25, 95% confidence interval 1.63-6.38, P = .002), secondary to bleeding, and lacerations to pleura, lung, and liver. Overall, 63 (18.2%) patients developed postoperative complications. Pre-existing mesh was associated with increased postoperative morbidity (37.1% vs 16.1%, odds ratio 3.09, 95% confidence interval 1.50-6.43, P = .005), particularly due to bleeding and respiratory complications. Importantly, pre-existing mesh independently predicted the occurrence of intraoperative and postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Prior hiatal mesh significantly increases morbidity during and after revisional antireflux surgery. Given that revisional surgery is increasingly being performed, our findings discourage routine mesh use during primary antireflux surgery.

Novel "starburst" mesh configuration for paraesophageal and recurrent hiatal hernia repair: comparison with keyhole mesh configuration

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists over the use of mesh, its type and configuration in repair of hiatal hernia. We have used biological mesh for large or recurrent hiatal hernias. We have developed a mesh configuration to better enhance the tensile strength of the hiatus by folding the mesh over the edge of the hiatus-entitled the "starburst" configuration. We report our experience with the starburst configuration, comparing it to our results with the keyhole configuration.

METHODS

Medical records of all patients undergoing either the keyhole or starburst mesh configuration hiatal hernia repair were reviewed between 2017 and 2021. Data gathered included age, sex, type of hernia (sliding, paraesophageal, or recurrent), fundoplication type (none, Nissen, Toupet, Dor, Collis-Nissen, Collis-Toupet, or magnetic sphincter augmentation [MSA]), 30-day complications, and long-term outcomes (hiatal hernia recurrence, reflux-symptom recurrence, dysphagia, dilations, reoperations).

RESULTS

From 7/2017 to 8/2019, 51 cases using the keyhole mesh were completed. Sliding hiatal hernia comprised 4%, paraesophageal hernia (PEH) 64% and recurrent hiatal hernia (RHH) 34% of cases. Distribution of fundoplication type: 2% none, 41% Nissen, 41% Toupet, 8% Dor, 2% Collis-Nissen, and 6% Collis-Toupet. 30-day complication rate 31%. Long-term outcomes: recurrent hiatal hernia 16%, dysphagia 12%, dysphagia requiring dilation(s) 10%, recurrent GERD symptoms 4%, and reoperation 14%. From 10/2020 to 8/2021, 58 cases using the starburst configuration were completed. PEH comprised 60% and RHH 40%. Distribution of fundoplication type: 10% none, 40% Nissen, 43% Toupet, 5% MSA, 2% Collis-Toupet. 30-day complication rate 16%. Long-term outcomes: recurrent hiatal hernia 19%, dysphagia 14%, dilations 5%, recurrent GERD symptoms 9%, and reoperations 3%.

CONCLUSION

The starburst mesh configuration compares favorably with the keyhole configuration with respect to postoperative dysphagia, need for esophageal dilation, and GERD symptom recurrence, with similar recurrence rates. We are continuing to further refine this technique and study the long-term 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 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.

Poor Metabolic Profile Is an Independent Risk Factor for Recurrence After Hiatal Hernia Repair When Using Tension-Free Mesh

Purpose: The effect of metabolic risk factors on the recurrence rate of hiatal hernia (HH) after the initial repair is still controversial. In this study, we evaluated whether a poor preoperative metabolic profile is a risk factor for the recurrence of a HH after surgery. Methods: Perioperative patient data were obtained from hospital records. A poor metabolic profile was defined as having two or more metabolic conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, or being overweight. The recurrence rates of HH were measured at 6 months, and again at 12 months after surgery. Results: Data were collected from a total of 221 patients. While 87 (39.4%) patients underwent tension-free mesh (TFM) repair, 137 (60.6%) were treated with suture repair. The poor metabolic profile has no effect on the recurrence rates in the suture-repair group. However, patients who underwent TFM repair displayed a significantly higher recurrence rate at the 12-month time point if they had poor metabolic profile, compared to the healthy group (respectively, 20.7% and 3.4%, P < .01). The logistic regression analysis showed that having a poor metabolic profile was an independent risk factor for recurrence after 12 months in the same group (odds ratio: 8.04 confidence interval [CI: 1.2-53.5] P = .03). Conclusion: The poor metabolic profile was found to be responsible for high recurrence rates only in patients who underwent TFM HH repair.

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.

Review of SAGES GERD guidelines and recommendations

BACKGROUND

The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) developed evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of this study is to evaluate guidelines lacking agreement among experts (grades B-D) or lacking support from randomized controlled trials (levels II-III).

METHODS

Six guidelines were chosen for evaluation. A retrospective review of a multicenter database of patients undergoing fundoplication surgery for treatment of GERD between 2015 and 2020 was performed. Patients that underwent a concurrent gastrectomy or were diagnosed with pre-operative achalasia were excluded. Demographics, pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative variables were collected. Post-operative outcomes were evaluated based on selected SAGES guidelines. Outcomes were assessed using multivariable regression or stratified analysis for each guideline.

RESULTS

A total of 444 patients from four institutions underwent surgery for the management of GERD with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 16 (13) months. Guidelines supported by our data were (1) robotic repair has similar short-term outcomes to laparoscopic repair, (2) outcomes in older patients are similar to outcomes of younger patients undergoing antireflux surgery, and (3) following laparoscopic antireflux surgery, dysphagia has been reported to significantly improve from pre-operative values. Guidelines that were not supported were (1) mesh reinforcement may be beneficial in decreasing the incidence of wrap herniation, (2) a bougie has been found to be effective, and (3) the long-term effectiveness of fundoplication in obese individuals (BMI > 30) has been questioned due to higher failure rates.

CONCLUSION

Many SAGES GERD guidelines not receiving Grade A or Level I recommendation are supported by large, multicenter database findings. However, further studies at low risk for bias are needed to further refine these guidelines.

Patient-tailored algorithm for laparoscopic cruroplasty standardization: comparison with hiatal surface area and medium-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Different methods have been described for laparoscopic hiatoplasty and hiatus hernia (HH) repair. All techniques are not standardized and the choice to reinforce or not the hiatus with a mesh is left to the operating surgeon's preference. Hiatal surface area (HSA) has been described as an attempt at standardization; in case the area is > 4 cm², a mesh is used to reinforce the repair.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe a new patient-tailored algorithm (PTA), compare its performance in predicting crura mesh buttressing to HSA, and analyze outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective, single-center, descriptive study (September 2018-September 2021). Adult patients (≥ 18 years old) who underwent laparoscopic HH repair. Outcomes and quality of life measured with the disease-specific gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) and reflux symptom index (RSI) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifty patients that underwent laparoscopic hiatoplasty and Toupet fundoplication were included. The median age was 61 years (range 32-83) and the median BMI was 26.7 (range 17-36). According to the PTA, 27 patients (54%) underwent simple suture repair while crural mesh buttressing with Phasix-ST® was used in 23 (46%). According to the HSA, the median hiatus area was 4.7 cm² while 26 patients had an HSA greater than 4 cm². The overall concordance rate between PTA and HSA was 94% (47/50). The median hospital stay was 1.9 days (range 1-8) and the 90-day complication rate was 4%. The median follow-up was 18.6 months (range 1-35). Hernia recurrence was diagnosed in 6%. Postoperative dysphagia occurred in one patient (2%). The GERD-HRQL (p < 0.001) and RSI (p = 0.001) were significantly improved.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of PTA for cruroplasty standardization in the setting of HH repair seems effective. While concordance with HSA is high, the PTA seems easier and promptly available in the operative theater with a potential increase in procedure standardization, reproducibility, and teaching.

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.