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.

Prevention of Incisional Hernia after Open Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Most hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) procedures are still performed through open approach. Incisional hernia (IH) is one of the most common complications after open surgery. To date, published data on IH after HPB surgery are scarce; therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the current evidence regarding incidence, risk factors, and prevention.

METHODS

Medline/PubMed (1946-2020), EMBASE (1947-2020), and the Cochrane library (1995-2020) were searched for studies on IH in open HPB surgery. Animal studies, editorials, letters, reviews, comments, short case series and liver transplant, laparoscopic, or robotic procedures were excluded. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020163296).

RESULTS

A total of 5,079 articles were retrieved. Eight studies were finally included for the analysis. The incidence of IH after HPB surgery ranges from 7.7% to 38.8%. The identified risk factors were body mass index, surgical site infection, ascites, Mercedes or reversed T incisions, and previous IH. Prophylactic mesh might be safe and effective.

CONCLUSIONS

IH after open HPB surgery is still an important matter. Some of the risk factors are specific for the HPB operations and the incision type should be carefully considered. Randomized controlled trials are required to confirm the role of prophylactic mesh after HPB operations.

Laparoscopic repair of complete intrathoracic stomach with iron deficiency anemia: A case report

BACKGROUND

Giant paraesophageal hiatal hernias (HH) are very infrequent, and their spectrum of clinical manifestations is large. Giant HH mainly occurs in elderly patients, and its relationship with anemia has been reported. For the surgical treatment of large HH, Nissen fundoplication is the most common antireflux procedure, and the reinforcement of HH repair with a patch (either synthetic or biologic) is still debatable.

CASE SUMMARY

We report on a case of giant paraesophageal HH in a middle-aged male patient with reflux symptoms and severe anemia. After performing a series of tests and diagnostic approaches, results showed a complete intrathoracic stomach associated with severe iron deficiency anemia. The patient underwent successful laparoscopic hernia repair with mesh reinforcement and Nissen fundoplication. Postoperatively, reflux symptoms were markedly relieved, and the imaging study showed complete reduction of the hernia sac. More importantly, anemia was resolved, and hemoglobin, serum iron and ferritin level were returned to the normal range. The patient kept regular follow-up appointments and remained in a satisfactory condition.

CONCLUSION

This case report highlights the relationship between large HH and iron deficiency anemia. For the surgical treatment of large HH, laparoscopic repair of large HH combined with antireflux procedure and mesh reinforcement is recommended.

Morgagni-Larrey diaphragmatic hernia repair in adult patients: a retrospective single-center experience

Purpose

Morgagni−Larrey congenital diaphragmatic hernia (MLH) is rare in adult patients and surgery is performed infrequently. The evidence regarding the most beneficial treatment modality is low. Nevertheless, with increasing experience in minimally-invasive surgery, the literature proves the laparoscopic approach as being safely feasible. However, knowledge on the disease as well as treatment options are based on single surgeon’s experiences and small case series in the literature.

Methods

Retrospective single-center analysis on adult patients (≥ 18 years) with MLH from 01/2003 to 06/2019 regarding symptoms, hernia sac contents, surgical technique and perioperative outcome.

Results

4.0% of diaphragmatic hernia repair procedures were performed for MLH (n = 11 patients). 27.3% of these patients were asymptomatic. Dyspnea or gastrointestinal symptoms were frequently observed (both in 45.5% of the patients). Colon transversum (63.6%), omentum majus (45.5%) and/or stomach (27.3%) were the most common hernia sac contents. Correct diagnosis was achieved preoperatively in 10/11 patients by cross-sectional imaging. All procedures were performed by trans-abdominal surgery (laparotomy in four and laparoscopy in seven patients). All hernias were reinforced by mesh after primary closure. No differences were observed in the perioperative outcome between patients who underwent hernia repair by laparotomy versus laparoscopy. Pleural complications requiring drainage were the most common postoperative complications.

Conclusion

MLH repair seems to be safely feasible by laparoscopic surgery. The benefit of mesh augmentation in MLH repair is not clear yet. In contrast to the current literature, all patients in this study received mesh augmentation after primary closure of the hernia. This should be evaluated in larger patient cohorts with long-term follow-up.

Reinforced staplers for distal pancreatectomy

PURPOSE

The safety and efficacy of reinforced staplers during distal pancreatectomy (DP) remain controversial because of the small sample size. This multicenter single-arm prospective study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of reinforced staplers with bioabsorbable material during DP.

METHODS

Between October 2014 and August 2015, 121 patients scheduled for DP were enrolled in this study at 11 institutions in Japan. The primary endpoint was the incidence of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula. Protocol treatment was defined as "distal pancreatectomy using reinforced staplers."

RESULTS

Per-protocol analysis of 105 patients was performed; 16 of the patients were excluded based on discontinuation of protocol treatment criteria. Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula occurred in 13 (12.4%) of 105 patients. The overall morbidity rate was 29.5% (31 of 105 patients) and severe complication (Clavien classification IIIa or more) was 10.5% (11/105). Mortality rate was 0%, although reoperations were performed on two patients (1.9%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis of independent risk factors for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula after DP using reinforced stapler closure was operative time more than 240 min (P = 0.047, odds ratio 5.79), registration numbers less than 10 (P = 0.046, odds ratio 13.01), and staple line hemorrhage (P = 0.003, odds ratio 16.34).

CONCLUSION

This study confirms the safety of reinforced staplers for pancreatic stump closure during DP. However, the efficacy of reinforced staplers for decreasing clinically relevant pancreatic fistula could not be drawn from this study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This prospective study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02270554) and UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000015384).

A case-controlled pilot study assessing the safety and efficacy of the Stapled Mesh stomA Reinforcement Technique (SMART) in reducing the incidence of parastomal herniation

BACKGROUND

Parastomal hernias (PH) are frequent with a high morbidity. Three randomised controlled trials have shown that prophylactic mesh stoma reinforcement significantly reduces their incidence. Implantation and fixation of mesh can be time-consuming, difficult to perform laparoscopically and does not deal with the excessive stretching of the trephine and the creation of an oversized defect. The Stapled Mesh stomA Reinforcement Technique (SMART) obviates these technical problems. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of a novel surgical technique called SMART in preventing parastomal herniation.

METHOD

SMART uses a purpose designed circular stapling gun (Compact™, Frankenman International Limited) of various diameters to create a precise trephine and simultaneously fixes a mesh sub-peritoneally and circumferentially to the trephine. Recruited patients were deemed to be high risk for parastomal herniation and randomisation in a controlled trial was contraindicated. Incidence of parastomal related symptoms and recurrences were documented at clinic visits and radiological confirmation of recurrences, when available, was used for final analysis. A control group of patients who underwent stoma resiting without mesh reinforcement for parastomal herniation was used for comparative purposes.

RESULTS

22 patients (16 F:6 M, mean age 49 ± 16 years, BMI 33.0 ± 7.0) underwent SMART (18 open, 4 laparoscopic). There were no intra-operative or early stoma complications. During a median FU of 21 months (range 12-24), four patients (19%) were diagnosed with recurrent parastomal herniation, one of which required re-operation. The parastomal herniation rate (73%) in the control group (6 F:5 M) was significantly higher (p = 0.003) although patients had similar age (59 ± 15 years, p = 0.1) and body-mass index (29.0 ± 3.0, p = 0.1).

CONCLUSION

SMART is a new and simple technique of precisely creating a reinforced stoma trephine at both open and laparoscopic surgery. It obviates the technical disadvantages of traditional stoma formation. This pilot study, in a selected group of patients at high risk for parastomal herniation, indicates that the procedure is clinically safe but randomised controlled trials are required to determine its efficacy in reducing parastomal herniation in all patients undergoing elective stoma formation.

Laparoscopic management of large hiatus hernia with mesh cruroplasty

PURPOSE

Laparoscopy has become the standard surgical approach to surgery for gastrooesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and hiatal hernia repair with excellent long-term results and high patient satisfaction. However several studies have shown that hiatal hernia repair, especially large hiatus are associated with high recurrence rate. Mesh reinforcement has been proposed for repair of large hiatus hernia. The objective of this study was to evaluate the role of mesh cruroplasty in management of large hiatus hernia (> 5 cm).

METHODS

Between February 2002 to December 2007, 73 patients (28 men and 45 women) who underwent laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair with mesh cruroplasty were included in our study. Mesh reinforcement (cruroplasty) was used for repair of large hiatus hernia (>5 cms hernial defect). Mean age was 50.4 years (range 30-72 years). Follow up included barium swallow of patients at 3 months and yearly thereafter.

RESULTS

Seventy-three patients underwent mesh cruroplasty for large hiatus hernia. We were able to adequately mobilise the oesophagus to achieve an intra-abdominal length of at least 3 cm in all patients. Intraoperative complication rate was 8.21% (6/73), intraoperative complications included pleural tear, bleeding from splenic capsule laceration and short gastric vessels. Postoperative complication rate was 4.1% (3/73), which included complete dyspahgia, atelactasis and pneumonia. Mean duration of hospitalisation was 3.5 days (range 3-9 days). Five patients (5/73) were lost to follow up. Four patients (5.8%) developed recurrence on routine follow up. No mesh related complications were noted on long-term follow up period. Mean follow up period was 3.2 years (range 5 months-6 years).

CONCLUSION

Our data supports the use of mesh in hiatal hernia repair, especially in large hiatus hernia as it leads to low recurrence rates. Longer follow up and more randomised controlled trials are needed to establish laparoscopic mesh cruroplasty as standard technique for large hiatal hernia repair.