Laparoscopic Repair of Hiatus Hernia: Does Mesh Type Influence Outcome? A Meta-analysis and European Survey Study

Overview

Journal Surg Endosc

Publisher Springer

Specialties Gastroenterology
General Surgery
Radiology

Date 2016 May 1

PMID 27129568

Citations 36

Authors

Jeremy R Huddy

Sheraz R Markar

Melody Z Ni

Mario Morino

Edoardo M Targarona

Giovanni Zaninotto

George B Hanna

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Synthetic mesh (SM) has been used in the laparoscopic repair of hiatus hernia but remains controversial due to reports of complications, most notably esophageal erosion. Biological mesh (BM) has been proposed as an alternative to mitigate this risk. The aim of this study is to establish the incidence of complications, recurrence and revision surgery in patients following suture (SR), SM or BM repair and undertake a survey of surgeons to establish a perspective of current practice.

Methods: An electronic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane database was performed. Pooled odds ratios (PORs) were calculated for discrete variables. To survey current practice an online questionnaire was sent to emails registered to the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.

Results: Nine studies were included, comprising 676 patients (310 with SR, 214 with SM and 152 with BM). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications with mesh compared to SR (P = 0.993). Mesh significantly reduced overall recurrence rates compared to SR [14.5 vs. 24.5 %; POR = 0.36 (95 % CI 0.17-0.77); P = 0.009]. Overall recurrence rates were reduced in the SM compared to BM groups (12.6 vs. 17.1 %), and similarly compared to the SR group, the POR for recurrence was lower in the SM group than the BM group [0.30 (95 % CI 0.12-0.73); P = 0.008 vs. 0.69 (95 % CI 0.26-1.83); P = 0.457]. Regarding surgical technique 503 survey responses were included. Mesh reinforcement of the crura was undertaken by 67 % of surgeons in all or selected cases with 67 % of these preferring synthetic mesh to absorbable mesh. One-fifth of the respondents had encountered mesh erosion in their career.

Conclusions: Both SM and BM reduce rates of recurrence compared to SR, with SM proving most effective. Surgical practice is varied, and there remains insufficient evidence regarding the optimum technique for the repair of hiatal hernia.

Citing Articles

PROsthetic MEsh Reinforcement in elective minimally invasive paraesophageal hernia repair (PROMER): an international survey.

Aiolfi A, Bona D, Sozzi A, Bonavina L Updates Surg. 2024; 76(7):2675-2682.

PMID: 39368031 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-024-02010-2.

Incidental Discovery of Asymptomatic Stage IV Hiatal Hernia With Complete Gastric Thoracic Herniation: A Case Report.

Qirem M, Yaghi S, Okwesili B, Atiyat R, Bains Y Cureus. 2024; 16(4):e58560.

PMID: 38765434 PMC: 11102347. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.58560.

The role of anterior gastropexy in elderly Japanese hiatal hernia patients.

Yokouchi T, Nakajima K, Takahashi T, Yamashita K, Saito T, Tanaka K Surg Today. 2024; 54(9):1051-1057.

PMID: 38514475 DOI: 10.1007/s00595-024-02809-x.

Adjuvant Botulinum Toxin Type A on the Management of Giant Hiatal Hernia: A Case Report.

Henriques C, Rodrigues E, Carvalho L, Pereira A, Nora M Cureus. 2024; 16(2):e53836.

PMID: 38465052 PMC: 10924647. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.53836.

Determining the need for a thoracoscopic approach to treat a giant hiatal hernia when abdominal access is poor.

Perez Lara F, Zubizarreta Jimenez R, Prieto-Puga Arjona T, Gutierrez Delgado P, Hernandez Carmona J, Hernandez Gonzalez J World J Gastrointest Surg. 2024; 15(12):2739-2746.

PMID: 38222019 PMC: 10784824. DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v15.i12.2739.

References

Stadlhuber R, Sherif A, Mittal S, Fitzgibbons Jr R, Brunt L, Hunter J . Mesh complications after prosthetic reinforcement of hiatal closure: a 28-case series. Surg Endosc. 2008; 23(6):1219-26. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-008-0205-5. View

Chilintseva N, Brigand C, Meyer C, Rohr S . Laparoscopic prosthetic hiatal reinforcement for large hiatal hernia repair. J Visc Surg. 2012; 149(3):e215-20. DOI: 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2012.01.006. View

Watson D, Thompson S, Devitt P, Smith L, Woods S, Aly A . Laparoscopic repair of very large hiatus hernia with sutures versus absorbable mesh versus nonabsorbable mesh: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2014; 261(2):282-9. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000842. View

Fuchs K, Babic B, Breithaupt W, Dallemagne B, Fingerhut A, Furnee E . EAES recommendations for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Endosc. 2014; 28(6):1753-73. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-014-3431-z. View

Higgins J, Thompson S . Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002; 21(11):1539-58. DOI: 10.1002/sim.1186. View

Frantzides C, Madan A, Carlson M, Stavropoulos G . A prospective, randomized trial of laparoscopic polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) patch repair vs simple cruroplasty for large hiatal hernia. Arch Surg. 2002; 137(6):649-52. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.137.6.649. View

Leeder P, Smith G, Dehn T . Laparoscopic management of large paraesophageal hiatal hernia. Surg Endosc. 2003; 17(9):1372-5. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-002-9192-0. View

Frantzides C, Carlson M, Loizides S, Papafili A, Luu M, Roberts J . Hiatal hernia repair with mesh: a survey of SAGES members. Surg Endosc. 2009; 24(5):1017-24. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-009-0718-6. View

Furnee E, Hazebroek E . Mesh in laparoscopic large hiatal hernia repair: a systematic review of the literature. Surg Endosc. 2013; 27(11):3998-4008. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-013-3036-y. View

10.

Morino M, Giaccone C, Pellegrino L, Rebecchi F . Laparoscopic management of giant hiatal hernia: factors influencing long-term outcome. Surg Endosc. 2006; 20(7):1011-6. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-005-0550-6. View

11.

Antoniou S, Antoniou G, Koch O, Pointner R, Granderath F . Lower recurrence rates after mesh-reinforced versus simple hiatal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2012; 22(6):498-502. DOI: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e3182747ac2. View

12.

DerSimonian R, Laird N . Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7(3):177-88. DOI: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2. View

13.

Memon M, Memon B, Yunus R, Khan S . Suture Cruroplasty Versus Prosthetic Hiatal Herniorrhaphy for Large Hiatal Hernia: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. Ann Surg. 2015; 263(2):258-66. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001267. View

14.

Schmidt E, Shaligram A, Reynoso J, Kothari V, Oleynikov D . Hiatal hernia repair with biologic mesh reinforcement reduces recurrence rate in small hiatal hernias. Dis Esophagus. 2013; 27(1):13-7. DOI: 10.1111/dote.12042. View

15.

Oelschlager B, Pellegrini C, Hunter J, Soper N, Brunt M, Sheppard B . Biologic prosthesis reduces recurrence after laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2006; 244(4):481-90. PMC: 1856552. DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000237759.42831.03. View

16.

Muller-Stich B, Holzinger F, Kapp T, Klaiber C . Laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair: long-term outcome with the focus on the influence of mesh reinforcement. Surg Endosc. 2006; 20(3):380-4. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-004-2272-6. View

17.

Granderath F, Granderath U, Pointner R . Laparoscopic revisional fundoplication with circular hiatal mesh prosthesis: the long-term results. World J Surg. 2008; 32(6):999-1007. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-008-9558-0. View

18.

Granderath F, Schweiger U, Kamolz T, Uwe Asche K, Pointner R . Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication with prosthetic hiatal closure reduces postoperative intrathoracic wrap herniation: preliminary results of a prospective randomized functional and clinical study. Arch Surg. 2005; 140(1):40-8. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.140.1.40. View

19.

Ringley C, Bochkarev V, Ahmed S, Vitamvas M, Oleynikov D . Laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair with human acellular dermal matrix patch: our initial experience. Am J Surg. 2006; 192(6):767-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2006.08.042. View

20.

Hazebroek E, Leibman S, Smith G . Erosion of a composite PTFE/ePTFE mesh after hiatal hernia repair. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2009; 19(2):175-7. DOI: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e3181a11926. View