Surgical and clinical outcomes comparison of mesh usage in laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair

Cruroplasty with or without mesh? A systematic literature review with a novel time-organized proportion meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Improved outcomes with the use of non-absorbable mesh (NAM) for inguinal hernia repairs led to its rapid adoption for hiatal hernia (HH) repairs; however, feared complications occurred, and the trend shifted toward using absorbable mesh (AM). We aimed to analyze the literature assessing objective HH recurrence rates after primary laparoscopic cruroplasty with or without the use of different mesh types.

METHODS

A systematic literature review with both pairwise and time-organized proportion meta-analyses of articles published between January 1993 and September 2022 was performed using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Taylor & Francis databases to identify relevant studies comparing groups undergoing cruroplasty with suture repair (SR) alone, AM, NAM, or partially absorbable mesh (PAM). Studies documenting an objective follow-up ≥ 6 months were included. The primary outcome was the HH recurrence rate confirmed by barium esophagram or upper GI endoscopy.

RESULTS

A total of 34 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 6 randomized clinical trials, 25 retrospectives studies, and 3 prospective cohort studies. A total of 2170 subjects underwent laparoscopic HH repair and completed an objective follow-up ≥ 6 months after surgery; the objective recurrence rate was 20.8% (99/477) at a mean follow-up of 25.8 ± 16.4 months for the SR group, 20.6% (244/1187) at 28.1 ± 13.8 months for the AM group, 13.7% (65/475) at 30.8 ± 15.3 months for the NAM group, and 0% (0/31) at 32.5 ± 13.5 months for the PAM group. However, the pairwise meta-analysis revealed that overall mesh use was not superior to SR in preventing long-term HH recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The use of AM does not appear to reduce HH recurrence compared to SR alone. Although the data favors NAM to decrease objective HH recurrence in the mid-term, the long-term (≥ 48 months) recurrence rate was similar with or without any type of mesh.

Hiatal hernia repair with biosynthetic mesh reinforcement: a qualitative systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Reinforcement of crural closure with synthetic resorbable mesh has been proposed to decrease recurrence rates after hiatal hernia repair, but continues to be controversial. This systematic review aims to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and intermediate-term results of using biosynthetic mesh to augment the hiatus.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed throughout this systematic review. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions and Risk of Bias in Randomized Trials tools were used to perform qualitative assessment of all studies included in this review. Recommendations were then summarized for the following pre-defined key items: protocol, research question, search strategy, study eligibility, data extraction, study design, risk of bias, publication bias, and statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The systematic literature search found 520 articles, 101 of which were duplicates and 355 articles were determined to be unrelated to our study and excluded. The full text of the remaining 64 articles was thoroughly assessed. A total of 18 articles (1846 patients) were ultimately included for this review, describing hiatal hernia repair using three different biosynthetic meshes-BIO-A, Phasix ST, and polyglactin mesh. Mean operative time varied from 127 to 223 min. Mean follow up varied from 12 to 54 months. There were no mesh erosions or explants. One mesh-related complication of stenosis requiring reoperation was reported with BIO-A. Studies showed significant improvement in symptom and quality-of-life scores, as well as satisfaction with surgery. Recurrence was reported as radiologic or clinical recurrence. Overall, recurrence rate varied from 0.9 to 25%.

CONCLUSION

The use of biosynthetic mesh is safe and effective for hiatal hernia repair with low complications rates and high symptom resolution. The reported recurrence rates are highly variable due to significant heterogeneity in defining and evaluating recurrences. Further randomized controlled trials with larger samples and long-term follow-up should be performed to better analyze outcomes and recurrence rates.

Robotic revision surgery after failed Nissen anti-reflux surgery: a single center experience and a literature review

BACKGROUND

The gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) worldwide prevalence is increasing maybe due to population aging and the obesity epidemic. Nissen fundoplication is the most common surgical procedure for GERD with a failure rate of approximately 20% which might require a redo surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic redo procedures after anti-reflux surgery failure including a narrative review.

METHODS

We reviewed our 15-year experience from 2005 to 2020 including 317 procedures, 306 for primary, and 11 for revisional surgery.

RESULTS

Patients included in the redo series underwent primary Nissen fundoplication with a mean age of 57.6 years (range, 43-71). All procedures were minimally invasive and no conversion to open surgery was registered. The meshes were used in five (45.45%) patients. The mean operative time was 147 min (range, 110-225) and the mean hospital stay was 3.2 days (range, 2-7). At a mean follow-up of 78 months (range, 18-192), one patient suffered for persistent dysphagia and one for delayed gastric emptying. We had two (18.19%) Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa complications, consisting of postoperative pneumothoraxes treated with chest drainage.

CONCLUSION

Redo anti-reflux surgery is indicated in selected patients and the robotic approach is safe when it is performed in specialized centers, considering its surgical technical difficulty.

Does bioabsorbable mesh reduce hiatal hernia recurrence rates? A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The use of bioabsorbable mesh at the hiatus is controversial. Long-term data are scant. We evaluated the world literature and performed a meta-analysis to determine if these meshes were effective in reducing recurrence.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, and ClinicalKey. We evaluated articles reporting on both Bio-A™ (polyglycolic acid:trimethylene carbonate-PGA:TMC) and Phasix™ (poly-4-hydroxybutyrate-P4HB) used at the hiatus. The DerSimonian-Laird random effects model was used to estimate the overall pooled treatment effect along with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Similar analysis was conducted to compare the clinical outcomes, i.e., recurrence rate, mean surgical time, mean hospital stays and mean follow-up duration between non-Mesh and Mesh group. The I² statistic was computed to assess the heterogeneity in effect sizes across the studies.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies (12 mesh studies with 963 subjects and 9 non-mesh studies with 617 subjects) were included to conduct the meta-analysis. There was one article reporting outcomes on P4HB mesh (73 subjects) and 11 on PGA:TMC mesh (890 subjects). The bioabsorbable mesh group had a significantly lower recurrence rate compared to the non-mesh group (8% vs. 18%; 95%CI 0.08-0.17), pooled p-value < 0.0001. Surgery time was shorter in the mesh group compared to the non-mesh group (136.4 min vs. 150 min) but not statistically significant (p = 0.54). There tended to be a more extended follow-up period after surgery in the non-mesh group compared to the mesh group (27 vs. 25.8 months, range 10.8-54 months); but not statistically significant (ES: 27.4; 95%CI 21.6-33.3; p = 0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Hiatal hernia repair with bioabsorbable mesh is more effective at reducing hernia recurrence rate in the mid-term than simple suture cruroplasty. Further studies investigating the long-term outcomes and P4HB mesh are needed.

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.

Complications, caused by application of the net implants in the hiatal hernias plasty

Objective. Studying of complications, connected with application of the net implants in patients with large hiatal hernias. Materials and methods. Retrospective investigation was conducted with objective to study complications, connected with application of the net implants in patients with large hiatal hernias, operated in the clinic during period from 2008 to 2018 yr. Of 1168 patients operated on and suffering gastro-esophageal reflux disease as well as hiatal hernias, 817 have had large hernias. In 353 patients with large hernias for strengthening of cruroraphy sutures the net implants were applied. There were used low-weighted implant-net Ultrapro, the composite net Parietex, self-fixating surgical net ProGrip, absorbable net Vicryl, polytetrafluoroethylene net with nitinol carcass, biological net Bio-A. All the patients symptoms were registered, and the quality of life studied. Results. Complications, caused by the net implants impact, were revealed in 17 (1.5%) patients. In all 17 patients the esophageal structuring have occurred due to pronounced cicatrization in region of the net implant installation. In 6 patients dysphagia due to the net ingrowth into esophageal tissue was observed, and in 2 – chronic inflammatory process in place of the net installation. One patient have had small esophageal perforation with restricted mediastinitis. In 3 patients, in whom the polytetrafluoroethylene nets were installed, their migration into esophageal lumen was revealed. Reoperations were done in all 17 patients. In 7 patients the net was removed completely. In 1 patient the net was removed and mediastinum drained. In 3 patients, in whom polytetrafluoroethylene nets have migrated into esophageal lumen, they were removed endoscopically with further installation of special stents. Results of reoperations were estimated as good in 15 patients. In 2 patients after reoperations dysphagia was observed, which needed a second time balloon dilatation and installation of stent in 1 of them. Conclusion. Nonabsorbable nets ought to be applied with high technical accuracy, it is necessary to prevent their contact with the esophagus. Application of the polytetrafluoroethylene nets with nitinol carcass for plasty of large hiatal hernias must be forbidden.

Concomitant hiatal hernia repair during bariatric surgery: does the reinforcement make the difference?

BACKGROUND

Hiatal hernia repair (HHR) is still controversial during bariatric procedures, especially in case of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

AIMS

to report the long-term results of concomitant HHR, evaluating the safety and efficacy of posterior cruroplasty (PC), simple or reinforced with biosynthetic, absorbable Bio-A^® mesh (Gore, Flagstaff, AZ, USA). Primary endpoint: PC's failure, defined as symptomatic HH recurrence, nonresponding to medical treatment and requiring revisional surgery.

METHODS

The prospective database of 1876 bariatric operations performed in a center of excellence between 2011-2019 was searched for concomitant HHR. Intraoperative measurement of the hiatal surface area (HSA) was performed routinely.

RESULTS

A total of 250 patients undergone bariatric surgery and concomitant HHR (13%). Simple PC (group A, 151 patients) was performed during 130 LSG, 5 re-sleeves and 16 gastric bypasses; mean BMI 43.4±5.8 kg/m², HSA mean size 3.4±2 cm². Reinforced PC (group B) was performed in 99 cases: 62 primary LSG, 22 LGB and 15 revisions of LSG; mean BMI 44.6±7.7 kg/m2, HSA mean size 6.7±2 cm². PC's failure, with intrathoracic migration (ITM) of the LSG was encountered in 12 cases (8%) of simple vs. only 4 cases (4%) of reinforced PC (P=0.23); hence, a repeat, reinforced PC and R-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) was performed laparoscopically in all cases. No mesh-related complications were registered perioperatively or after long-term follow-up (mean 50 months). One case of cardiac metaplasia without goblet cells was detected 4 years postoperatively; conversion to LRYGB, with reinforced redo of the PC was performed. The Cox hazard analysis showed that the use of more than four stitches for cruroplasty represents a negative factor on recurrence (HR=8; P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

An aggressive search for and repair of HH during any bariatric procedure seems advisable, allowing a low HH recurrence rates. Additional measures, like mesh reinforcement of crural closure with biosynthetic, absorbable mesh, seem to improve results on long term follow-up, especially in case of larger hiatal defects. In our experience, reinforcement of even smaller defects seems advisable in obese population.