The use of crural relaxing incisions with biologic mesh reinforcement during laparoscopic repair of complex hiatal hernias

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.

BRAZILIAN HERNIA AND ABDOMINAL WALL SOCIETY STATEMENT ON LARGE HIATAL HERNIAS MANAGEMENT

Large hiatal hernias, besides being more prevalent in the elderly, have a different clinical presentation: less reflux, more mechanical symptoms, and a greater possibility of acute, life-threatening complications such as gastric volvulus, ischemia, and visceral mediastinal perforation. Thus, surgical indications are distinct from gastroesophageal reflux disease-related sliding hiatal hernias. Heartburn tends to be less intense, while symptoms of chest pain, cough, discomfort, and tiredness are reported more frequently. Complaints of vomiting and dysphagia may suggest the presence of associated gastric volvulus. Signs of iron deficiency and anemia are found. Surgical indication is still controversial and was previously based on high mortality reported in emergency surgeries for gastric volvulus. Postoperative mortality is especially related to three factors: body mass index above 35, age over 70 years, and the presence of comorbidities. Minimally invasive elective surgery should be offered to symptomatic individuals with good or reasonable performance status, regardless of age group. In asymptomatic and oligosymptomatic patients, besides obviously identifying the patient's desire, a case-by-case analysis of surgical risk factors such as age, obesity, and comorbidities should be taken into consideration. Attention should also be paid to situations with greater technical difficulty and risks of acute migration due to increased abdominal pressure (abdominoplasty, manual labor, spastic diseases). Technical alternatives such as partial fundoplication and anterior gastropexy can be considered. We emphasize the importance of performing surgical procedures in cases of large hiatal hernias in high-volume centers, with experienced surgeons.

Hiatal Hernia Repair: Can We Predict the Need for Mesh?

Introduction: The use of mesh for paraesophageal hernia repair is controversial due to concerns about long-term complications. This study aimed to investigate whether preoperative imaging characteristics of diaphragmatic hernia could predict the need for mesh repair. Methods: The records of all patients who underwent laparoscopic diaphragmatic hernia repair between September 2015 and September 2022 were reviewed. Patients' preoperative computerized tomography (CT) imaging was reviewed and was correlated with mesh repair. Results: A total of 53 patients were included in the study. Volumetric measurements were obtained from preoperative CT scans to assess hiatal defect area (HDA) and hernia sac volume (HSV). Mesh repair was required in 43.4% of cases, all among types II-IV. The mesh repair group had a higher mean hiatal neck height (50.8 ± 16.35 versus 43.22 ± 17.08 mm, P < .032) and higher HSV (708.53 ± 577.6 versus 346.866 ± 321.65 cm3, P < .003). There was also a borderline difference in HDA mean values (23.78 ± 17.22 versus 16.8 ± 10.41 cm2, P < .059). Conclusions: Preoperative HSV on CT scans can be a valuable predictor for the need for mesh repair during hiatal hernia surgery, aiding surgical planning and decision-making. Further research is needed to validate these findings and optimize hernia repair outcomes.

Impact of laparoscopic repair on type III/IV giant paraesophageal hernias: a single-center experience

PURPOSE

Giant paraesophageal hernia (GPEH) is a challenging problem for surgeons because of its high recurrence rate. This study was conducted to compare the outcomes in type IV vs. type III GPEHs after laparoscopic repair. Other outcomes included peri-operative morbidity and long-term quality of life.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 130 GPEH patients in a period between 2010 and 2019 underwent a tailored laparoscopic repair in our tertiary center with a minimum follow-up of 48 months. Operative steps included hernial sac excision, crural repair, relaxing incisions, and mesh cruroplasty with special indications.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 90 patients with type III and 40 patients with type IV GPEH. Type IV GPEH patients were older, more fragile, and scored worse on ASA classification, aside from having a more challenging surgical technique (wider crura, weaker muscles, increased need for release incisions, and mesh cruroplasty).Type IV GPEHs had a prolonged operative durations, and a higher conversion rate. Additionally, the same group showed increased morbidity, mortality, and re-operation rates. With a mean follow-up of 65 months (range 48-150 months), the incidence of recurrence was 20.7%, with an increased incidence in type IV GPEH (37.5% vs. 13.33% in type III GPEH). Type IV GPEH, low pre-operative albumin, larger crural defect, and low surgeon experience were significant risk factors for recurrence after laparoscopic repair of GPEH.

CONCLUSION

Type IV GPEH has a higher peri-operative morbidity and recurrence rate; so, a more tailored laparoscopic repair with a high surgeon experience is needed.

Diaphragmatic relaxing incisions for complex hiatal reconstruction: longer-term follow-up confirms safety, efficacy and rare complications

BACKGROUND

Tension is an important factor in hernia repairs. Relaxing incisions to reduce tension are common with ventral hernia repairs, and techniques for relaxing incisions also exist for the hiatus. The aim of this study was to update our original experience with a diaphragm relaxing incision (DRI) in a larger group of patients with longer follow-up.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed to identify all patients who had a DRI between August 2016 and September 2021 during hiatal hernia repair. All DRI defects were repaired with permanent mesh remote from the esophagus. Objective follow-up was with chest x-ray, upper GI series (UGI) or both.

RESULTS

Seventy-three patients had a total of 79 DRI (right in 63, left in 4, and bilateral in 6 patients), during a primary (n = 52) or redo (n = 21) hiatal hernia repair. Concomitant Collis gastroplasty was used in 38 patients (52%). A single intra-operative complication occurred where the right crus tore during a right DRI. At a median of 15 months, 78% of patients had objective follow-up. There was one hernia through a repaired right DRI (1.2%). No patient had evidence of diaphragm paralysis and there were no mesh infections. The 1-year hernia recurrence rate in these patients was 3.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

A DRI can be done safely with minimal risk of intra- or post-operative complications. There was a low rate of herniation through the defect when repaired with permanent mesh. No patient developed a mesh infection despite concomitant Collis gastroplasty in 52% of patients, and there was no evidence of diaphragm paralysis on imaging studies. Further, the low rate of hiatal hernia recurrence suggests efficacy of a DRI to reduce crural closure tension. These excellent outcomes should encourage use of a DRI in patients with a difficult hiatus during hernia repair.

Management of Recurrent Paraesophageal Hernia

Introduction: Recurrent paraesophageal hernias (rPEH) represent a clinical and surgical challenge. Even with a relatively high incidence, most of them are minimally symptomatic, and the need for reoperation is low. For those patients who are candidates for surgery, laparoscopic revision is a feasible and safe technique although there are other treatment options available. Methods: This article provides an overview of the definition, mechanisms of recurrence, epidemiology, clinical presentation, and indications for treatment of rPEH, as well as an overview of the surgical management options and a description of the technical principles of the repair and/or resection. Results: Surgeons should consider multiple factors when deciding the appropriate treatment of patients with rPEH, and all of them require a complete and comprehensive evaluation. The surgical options need to be individualized and include a redo PEH repair and revisional fundoplication, a partial or total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction, or an esophagectomy. There are key steps during the surgical repair that contribute to a successful operation and also auxiliary techniques that can improve postoperative outcomes. After laparoscopic redo most patients have improvement of their symptoms and an acceptable rate of perioperative complications when they are performed by experienced foregut surgeons. In obese patients with rPEH, bariatric surgery can be the best treatment option. Conclusions: Laparoscopic reoperative management should be considered in symptomatic patients who are not controlled with maximal nonoperative therapy, after a thorough work-up and appropriate counseling. In cases with multiple hernia repairs, it is important to consider alternative operations.

Large hiatus hernia: time for a paradigm shift?

Background

Laparoscopic large hiatal hernia (LHH) repair remains a challenge despite three decades of ongoing attempts at improving surgical outcome. Its rarity and complexity, coupled with suboptimal initial approach that is usually best suited for small symptomatic herniae have contributed to unacceptable higher failure rates.

Results

We have therefore undertaken a systematic appraisal of LHH with a view to clear out our misunderstandings of this entity and to address dogmatic practices that may have contributed to poor outcomes.

Conclusions

First, we propose strict criteria to define nomenclature in LHH and discuss ways of subcategorising them. Next, we discuss preoperative workup strategies, paying particular attention to any relevant often atypical symptoms, indications for surgery, timing of surgery, role of surgery in the elderly and emphasizing the key role of a preoperative CT imaging in evaluating the mediastinum. Some key dissection methods are then discussed with respect to approach to the mediastinal sac, techniques to avoid/deal with pleural breach and rationale to avoid Collis gastroplasty. The issues pertaining to the repair phase are also discussed by evaluating the merits of the cruroplasty, fundoplication types and gastropexy. We end up debating the role of mesh reinforcement and assess the evidence with regards to recurrence, reoperation rate, complications, esophageal dilatation, delayed gastric emptying and mortality. Lastly, we propose a rationale for routine postoperative investigations.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing paraesophageal hernia repair with selective use of biologic mesh

BACKGROUND

The use of biologic mesh in paraesophageal hernia repair (PEHR) has been associated with decreased short-term recurrence but no statistically significant difference in long-term recurrence. Because of this, we transitioned from routine to selective use of mesh for PEHR. The aim of this study was to examine our indications for selective mesh use and to evaluate patient outcomes in this population.

METHODS

We queried a prospectively maintained database for patients who underwent laparoscopic PEHR with biologic mesh from October 2015 to October 2018, then performed a retrospective chart review. The decision to use mesh was made intraoperatively by the surgeon. Recurrence was defined as the presence of > 2 cm intrathoracic stomach on postoperative upper gastrointestinal (UGI) series.

RESULTS

Mesh was used in 61/169 (36%) of first-time PEHRs, and in 47/82 (57%) of redo PEHRs. Among first-time PEHRs, the indications for mesh included hiatal tension (85%), poor crural tissue quality (11%), or both (5%). Radiographic recurrence occurred in 15% of first-time patients (symptomatic N = 2, asymptomatic N = 3). There were no reoperations for recurrence. Among redo PEHRs, the indication for mesh was most commonly the redo nature of the repair itself (55%), but also hiatal tension (51%), poor crural tissue quality (13%), or both (4%). Radiographic recurrence occurred in 21% of patients (symptomatic N = 4, asymptomatic N = 1). There was 1 reoperation for recurrence in the redo-repair group.

CONCLUSIONS

We selectively use biologic mesh in a third of our first-time repair patients and in over half of our redo-repair patients when there is a perceived high risk of recurrence based on hiatal tension, poor tissue quality, or prior recurrence. Despite the high risk for radiologic recurrence, there was only 1 reoperation for recurrence in the entire cohort.

Prosthetic Reinforcement in Hiatal Hernia Repair, Does Mesh Material Matter? A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: Hiatal hernia repair (HHR) is a complex surgical procedure and its management is not standardized. Several meta-analyses have compared cruroplasty with hiatus reinforcement with mesh, and crura augmentation appears to have better outcomes. However, heterogeneity in type of mesh and placement techniques has differed significantly. Materials and Methods: A systematic review and network meta-analysis were carried out. An electronic systematic research was carried out throughout Pubmed, CENTRAL, and Web of Science, of articles analyzing HHR with cruroplasty, nonabsorbable mesh (NAM), and absorbable mesh (AM) reinforcement. Results: Seventeen articles based on 1857 patients were enrolled in this article. The point estimation showed that when compared against the control group (NAM), the HH recurrence risk in AM and cruroplasty group was higher (relative ratio [RR] 2.3; CrI 0.8-6.3, RR 3.6; CrI 2.0-8.3, respectively). Postoperative complication rates were alike in all groups. The prevalence of mesh erosion after HHR is low. Conclusions: This network meta-analysis showed that prosthetic reinforcement significantly reduced HH recurrence when compared with cruroplasty alone. However, there is not enough evidence to compare different mesh compositions.

The use of biosynthetic mesh in giant hiatal hernia repair: is there a rationale? A 3-year single-center experience

PURPOSE

Reinforced prosthetic crural repair is particularly indicated for giant hiatal hernias. The rationale is to reduce the recurrence rate in the long term. The aim of our study is to evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic giant hiatal hernia repair using a biosynthetic mesh.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 44 patients who underwent laparoscopic mesh-reinforced hiatal closure and fundoplication using a biosynthetic material. Inclusion criterion was large hiatal defects (> 5 cm). Follow-up was scheduled at 6, 12 and 36 months after surgery.

RESULTS

44 patients (29F) with a mean age of 62 years (range 14-85) and mean of BMI 24.5 kg/m² (range 21-29) underwent successful laparoscopic repair. Twenty-six (59.1%) patients had Nissen-Rossetti fundoplication, whereas 18 (40.9%) had Toupet fundoplication. Six-month questionnaire for the evaluation of symptoms was available for 43 patients (97.7%) and for 40 (90.9%) patients at 12 and 36 months. Mean preoperative symptoms score analysis was 1.68 ± 0.73. Mean scores at each follow-up time were significantly improved compared to baseline (p > 0.05). Barium swallow was available in 37 patients (84.1%) at 1 year after surgery. Radiologic recurrence was observed in two patients (4.5%). No patient had symptoms attributable to recurrence or required revisional surgery. There were no mesh-related complications at 3 years follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of biosynthetic mesh for crural reinforcement is associated with a low incidence of mesh-related complications and with a reasonably low recurrence rate (4.5%) at 36 months. However, additional data with longer follow-up are needed to determine long-term safety and efficacy.

Management of paraesophageal hernia review of clinical studies: timing to surgery, mesh use, fundoplication, gastropexy and other controversies

Despite paraesophageal hernias (PEH) being a common disorder, several aspects of their management remain elusive. Elective surgery in asymptomatic patients, management of acute presentation, and other technical aspects such as utilization of mesh, fundoplication or gastropexy are some of the debated issues. The aim of this study was to review the available evidence in an attempt to clarify current controversial topics. PEH repair in an asymptomatic patient may be reasonable in selected patients to avoid potential morbidity of an emergent operation. In acute presentation, gastric decompression and resuscitation could allow to improve the patient's condition and refer the repair to a more experienced surgical team. When surgical repair is decided, laparoscopy is the optimal approach in most of the cases. Mesh should be used in selected patients such as those with large PEH or redo operations. While a fundoplication is recommended in the majority of patients to prevent postoperative reflux, a gastropexy can be used in selected cases to facilitate postoperative care.

Anatomic Observation of Recurrent Hiatal Hernia: Recurrence or Disease Progression?

BACKGROUND

Recurrence after hiatal hernia repair is common. The causes are uncertain. Our observation is the site of recurrence is primarily the nonsutured or nonreinforced anterior-left lateral portion of the hiatus. Our aim was to assess the distribution of hiatal hernia recurrence location as a basis for developing a theory of recurrence.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent repair of recurrent hiatal hernias from March 2012 to December 2019 were reviewed. Data collected included age, sex, date of operation, location of hiatal hernia recurrence, operative approach, method of hiatal hernia repair, fundoplication performed, need for gastrectomy, and additional procedures.

RESULTS

One hundred and eight consecutive patients were studied. The distribution of recurrence locations was as follows: anterior 67%, posterior 12%, and circumferential 21%. Foreshortened esophagus was a contributing factor in 12%. Median time from the original repair to recurrence was 1.5 years (interquartile range 0.9 to 3.75 years) for posterior recurrences, 2.75 years (interquartile range 1.15 to 8.5 years) for circumferential recurrences, and 3.25 years (interquartile range 1.38 to 10 years) for anterior recurrences. Recurrences were repaired in a variety of techniques, depending on the clinical circumstances.

CONCLUSIONS

Hiatal hernia recurrences due to failure of the crural closure were less common, but early, recurrences. The majority of recurrences were due to stretching of the hiatus anterior and to the left of the esophagus. We theorize that the pathophysiology of late hiatal hernia recurrence is widening of the anterior and left lateral portion of the hiatus secondary to repeated stress from differential pressures that eventually overcomes the tensile strength of the hiatus.

Minimally invasive surgery for large hiatal hernia

The majority of large hiatal hernias are paraesophageal hiatal hernias (PEH). Once prolapse of the stomach to the chest cavity reaches a high degree, it is called an intrathoracic stomach. More than 25 years have elapsed since laparoscopic surgery was carried out as minimally invasive surgery for PEH. The feasibility and safety thereof has nearly been established. PEH may cause serious complications such as strangulation and perforation. The outcome of elective repair of PEH is better than emergent repair, so we should carry out elective repair as much as possible. Although not a major clinical problem, following PEH repair the rate of anatomical recurrence increases with age. In order to reduce the recurrence rate, mesh reinforcement by crural repair has been widely performed. Although this improves the short-term outcomes, the long-term outcomes are unclear. For PEH repair, fundoplication and gastropexy are believed desirable. We should select the procedure associated with a lower incidence of dysphagia and so on following surgery. While relaxing incision is useful for primary tension-free closure, it has not contributed to improvement in the recurrence rate.

Treatment of paraesophageal hiatal hernia in octogenarians: a systematic review and retrospective cohort study

Over the coming years octogenarians will make up an increasingly large proportion of the population. With the rise in octogenarians more paraesophageal hiatal hernias may be identified. In research for the optimal treatment for paraesophageal hiatal hernias, octogenarians are often omitted and the optimal surgical strategy for this patient group remains unclear. A systematic search in PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library was conducted, including articles compromising 'surgery,' 'paraesophageal hiatal hernia,' and 'octogenarians.' Selection of articles was based on independent review by two authors. Alongside, a retrospective cohort study was conducted including all type II-IV hiatal hernia repairs performed in the VU Medical Center in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, from 2005 to 2015. A total of 486 papers were eligible for selection. After careful selection, a total of eight articles were included. All articles were retrospective cohort studies describing different proportions of octogenarians. The populations and surgical techniques were very heterogeneous. Elective paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair was performed safely in symptomatic octogenarians in all studies. Additional analysis of 84 patients, of which 9.5% octogenarians, was performed at our tertiary referral center. A larger hernia type, more acute interventions and a higher morbidity and mortality rate was observed in octogenarians compared to patients aged <80 years. In conclusion, elective paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair can be performed in octogenarians, especially in patients without comorbidity. Findings suggest improvement in symptoms in short-term follow up, with minimal morbidity and mortality. With regard to surgical techniques, laparoscopy and fundoplication were performed safely. Octogenarians need to be included in future clinical trials to further evaluate the optimal surgical intervention. Preoperative risk assessment by clinical prediction rules should guide operative intervention, in order to evaluate risks and benefits in this challenging population.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic mesh versus suture repair of hiatus hernia: objective and subjective outcomes

Background

Hiatus hernia (HH) contributes to the pathophysiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Mesh-augmentation of surgical repair might be associated with a reduced risk of recurrence and GERD. However, recurrence rates, mesh-associated complications and quality of life (QOL) after mesh versus suture repair are debated. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine HH recurrence following mesh-augmentation versus suture repair. Secondary aims were to compare complications, mortality, QOL and GERD symptoms following different repair techniques.

Methods

A systematic literature search of the PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Springer database was performed to identify relevant studies comparing mesh-augmentation versus suture repair of the esophageal hiatus. Data pertinent to the benefit versus risk outcomes for these techniques were extracted and compared by meta-analysis. The odd ratio (OR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

Results

Eleven studies (4 randomized, 9 non-randomized) comparing mesh (n = 719) versus suture (n = 755) repair were identified. Mesh-augmentation was associated with a reduced overall recurrence rate compared to suture repair [2.6 vs. 9.4%, OR 0.23 (95% CI 0.14–0.39), P < 0.00001]. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications (P = 0.400) between groups. Improvement in QOL measured by SF-36 was greater following biological mesh-augmentation compared to suture repair (MD = 13.68, 95% CI 2.51–24.85, P = 0.020), as well as GERD-HRQL. No differences were seen for the GIQLI scores with permanent mesh (P = 0.530). Dysphagia improvements were better following suture repair (MD = 1.47, 95% CI 0.20–2.74, P = 0.020).

Conclusions

Mesh repair of HH conferred some advantages and disadvantages at short-term follow-up. Compared to a suture repair alone, mesh-augmentation might be associated with less short-term recurrences, and biological mesh was associated with improved short-term QOL. However, these advantages were offset by more dysphagia. Long-term outcomes are still needed to determine the place of mesh repair of HH.