2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Laparoscopic giant hiatal hernia repair with absorbable mesh

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          The best operative approach to large hiatal hernias still remains controversial between suture cruroplasty and prosthetic hiatal herniorrhaphy. This study aims at analysing results from a single institution in Italy in terms of subjective and objective outcomes.

          Methods:

          Retrospectively collected data of all patients that underwent laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair since 2011 were considered. Sixty-five patients were included overall; 17 of them fit the criteria of large hiatal hernia. Follow-up (FU) was assessed by visit, questionnaires and X-ray imaging.

          Results:

          No major complications occurred in the post-operative course. No patient was lost during the FU period. Out of all the patients included, 13 agreed to have an X-ray with water-soluble contrast. The questionnaires showed a 76.5% rate of satisfaction (13 patients), and the recurrence rate demonstrated by radiology was 29.4% (five patients). There were no major mesh-related complications.

          Conclusion:

          The best operative approach for large hiatal hernias remains far from standardised: There is a lack of evidence on the use of a mesh for this kind of surgery as well as substantial controversy over the definition of what a giant hiatal hernia is. Nevertheless, the results from this study and the main studies in the literature seem to be encouraging in improving giant hiatal hernia repair outcomes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Biologic prosthesis to prevent recurrence after laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: long-term follow-up from a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial.

          In 2006, we reported results of a randomized trial of laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair (LPEHR), comparing primary diaphragm repair (PR) with primary repair buttressed with a biologic prosthesis (small intestinal submucosa [SIS]). The primary endpoint, radiologic hiatal hernia (HH) recurrence, was higher with PR (24%) than with SIS buttressed repair (9%) after 6 months. The second phase of this trial was designed to determine the long-term durability of biologic mesh-buttressed repair. We systematically searched for the 108 patients in phase I of this study to assess current clinical symptoms, quality of life (QOL) and determine ongoing durability of the repair by obtaining a follow-up upper gastrointestinal series (UGI) read by 2 radiologists blinded to treatment received. HH recurrence was defined as the greatest measured vertical height of stomach being at least 2 cm above the diaphragm. At median follow-up of 58 months (range 42 to 78 mo), 10 patients had died, 26 patients were not found, 72 completed clinical follow-up (PR, n = 39; SIS, n = 33), and 60 repeated a UGI (PR, n = 34; SIS, n = 26). There were 20 patients (59%) with recurrent HH in the PR group and 14 patients (54%) with recurrent HH in the SIS group (p = 0.7). There was no statistically significant difference in relevant symptoms or QOL between patients undergoing PR and SIS buttressed repair. There were no strictures, erosions, dysphagia, or other complications related to the use of SIS mesh. LPEHR results in long and durable relief of symptoms and improvement in QOL with PR or SIS. There does not appear to be a higher rate of complications or side effects with biologic mesh, but its benefit in reducing HH recurrence diminishes at long-term follow-up (more than 5 years postoperatively) or earlier. Copyright © 2011 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Guidelines for the management of hiatal hernia.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A prospective, randomized trial of laparoscopic polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) patch repair vs simple cruroplasty for large hiatal hernia.

              Large hiatal hernias are prone to disruption, resulting in reherniation, when repaired with simple cruroplasty. The use of mesh may decrease the rate of reherniation in the laparoscopic repair of large hiatal hernias. Prospective, randomized controlled trial. University-affiliated private hospital. Seventy-two individuals undergoing laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication with a hernia defect greater or equal to 8 cm in diameter. Nissen fundoplication with posterior cruroplasty (n = 36) vs Nissen fundoplication with posterior cruroplasty and onlay of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) mesh (n = 36). Recurrences, complications, hospital stay, operative time, and cost. Patients in both groups had similar hospital stays, but the PTFE group had a longer operative time. The cost of the repair was $960 +/- $70 more in the group with the prosthesis. Complications were minor and similar in both groups. There were 8 hernia recurrences (22%) in the primary repair group and none in the PTFE group (P<.006). The use of prosthetic reinforcement of cruroplasty in large hiatal hernias may prevent hernia recurrences.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Minim Access Surg
                J Minim Access Surg
                JMAS
                Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
                Wolters Kluwer - Medknow (India )
                0972-9941
                1998-3921
                Apr-Jun 2022
                16 July 2021
                : 18
                : 2
                : 248-253
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Emergency Surgery Unit, DEA Department, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
                [2 ]Sperimental and Clinical Science Department “Mario Serio”, Florence University, Florence, Italy
                Author notes
                Address for correspondence: Dr. Massimiliano Ardu, Emergency Surgery Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Largo Brambilla 3 50134, Florence, Italy. E-mail: massimiliano.ardu@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                JMAS-18-248
                10.4103/jmas.JMAS_26_21
                8973483
                35313434
                90a599d5-b663-4757-9731-71ba46f26d38
                Copyright: © 2021 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery

                This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

                History
                : 16 January 2021
                : 04 March 2021
                : 27 April 2021
                Categories
                Original Article

                Surgery
                hiatal hernia,laparoscopy,upper gastrointestinal
                Surgery
                hiatal hernia, laparoscopy, upper gastrointestinal

                Comments

                Comment on this article