The incidence of hiatal hernia after minimally invasive esophagectomy

Presentation and management of post-esophagectomy or Gastrectomy Hiatal Hernia

PURPOSE

Hiatal hernia may development after esophagectomy or Gastrectomy. Post- esophago-gastric hiatal hernia is a rare but challenging condition. Nearly half of reported cases involve emergent situations, underscoring the urgency of addressing this condition. However, there is currently no consensus on the optimal treatment approach for this type of hernia.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent repair for Post- esophago-gastric hiatal hernia over the past five years were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics and perioperative data were collected. The primary outcomes, repair methods, and surgical results following post-esophago-gastric hiatal repair were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of eight patients with post-esophago-gastric hiatal hernia were included in this study. All patients presented with emergent conditions, specifically bowel obstruction. Laparoscopic repair was successful in four cases, with a conversion rate to open surgery of 50% (4 out of 8). Primary suture was performed in three cases, while biological mesh repair was carried out in four cases, and one case was left unrepaired. Bowel gangrene and perforation occurred in one case. The most notable postoperative complications included wound infection and pleural fluid collection. Importantly, there were no instances of hernia recurrence during the follow-up period, which ranged from 2 to 55 months, with a 100% follow-up rate observed.

CONCLUSION

Post-esophago-gastric hiatal hernia is a rare yet significant condition, often presenting emergently and linked to higher morbidity and mortality rates. Therefore, symptomatic patients warrant surgical repair, and immediate intervention should be provided to those with acute-onset symptoms and clinical signs of bowel obstruction. Primary suture repair, with or without biological mesh, appears to be a durable method of repair.

Paraconduit hernia following esophagectomy: Is it safe to watch and wait?

OBJECTIVES

We hypothesized that emergency complications related to asymptomatic paraconduit hernias may occur less often than generally believed. Therefore, we assessed the occurrence and timing of paraconduit hernia diagnosis after esophagectomy, as well as outcomes of these asymptomatic patients managed with a watch-and-wait approach.

METHODS

From 2006 to 2021, 1214 patients underwent esophagectomy with reconstruction at the Cleveland Clinic. Among these patients, computed tomography scans were reviewed to identify paraconduit hernias. Medical records were reviewed for timing of hernia diagnosis, hernia characteristics, and patient symptoms, complications, and management. During this period, patients with asymptomatic paraconduit hernias were typically managed nonoperatively.

RESULTS

Paraconduit hernias were identified in 37 patients. Of these, 31 (84%) had a pre-esophagectomy hiatal hernia. Twenty-one hernias (57%) contained colon, 7 hernias (19%) contained pancreas, and 9 hernias (24%) contained multiple organs. Estimated prevalence of paraconduit hernia was 3.3% at 3 years and 7.7% at 10 years. Seven patients (19%) had symptoms, 4 of whom were repaired electively, with 2 currently awaiting repairs. No patient with a paraconduit hernia experienced an acute complication that required emergency intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of paraconduit hernia increases with time, suggesting that long-term symptom surveillance is reasonable. Emergency complications as a result of asymptomatic paraconduit hernias are rare. A small number of patients will experience hernia-related symptoms, sometimes years after hernia diagnosis. Our findings suggest that observation of asymptomatic paraconduit hernias (watch and wait) may be considered, with repair considered electively in patients with persistent symptoms.

Postoperative Hiatal Hernia after Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy-A Growing Problem in the Age of Minimally Invasive Surgery

BACKGROUND

Even though minimally invasive esophagectomy is a safe and oncologically effective procedure, several authors have reported an increased risk of postoperative hiatal hernia (PHH). This study evaluates the incidence and risk factors of PHH after hybrid minimally invasive (HMIE) versus open esophagectomy (OE).

METHODS

A retrospective single-center analysis was performed on patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy between January 2009 and April 2018. Computed tomography scans and patient files were reviewed to identify the PHH.

RESULTS

306 patients were included (152 HMIE; 154 OE). Of these, 23 patients (8%) developed PHH. Most patients (13/23, 57%) were asymptomatic at the time of diagnosis and only 4 patients (17%) presented in an emergency setting with incarceration. The rate of PHH was significantly higher after HMIE compared to OE (13.8% vs. 1.3%, p < 0.001). No other risk factors for the development of PHH were identified in uni- or multi-variate analysis. Surgical repair of PHH was performed in 19/23 patients (83%). The recurrence rate of PHH after surgical repair was 32% (6/19 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

The development of PHH is a relevant complication after hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy. Although most patients are asymptomatic, surgical repair is recommended to avoid incarceration with potentially fatal outcomes. Innovative techniques for the prevention and repair of PHH are urgently needed.

Increased risk of diaphragmatic herniation following esophagectomy with a minimally invasive abdominal approach

OBJECTIVE

Diaphragmatic herniation is a rare complication following esophagectomy, associated with risks of aspiration pneumonia, bowel obstruction, and strangulation. Repair can be challenging due to the presence of the gastric conduit. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the incidence and risk factors associated with diaphragmatic herniation following esophagectomy, the timing and mode of presentation, and outcomes of repair.

METHODS

A systematic search using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines was performed using four major databases. A meta-analysis of diaphragmatic herniation incidence following esophagectomies with a minimally invasive abdominal (MIA) approach compared with open esophagectomies was conducted. Qualitative analysis was performed for tumor location, associated symptoms, time to presentation, and outcomes of postdiaphragmatic herniation repair.

RESULTS

This systematic review consisted of 17,052 patients from 32 studies. The risk of diaphragmatic herniation was 2.74 times higher in MIA esophagectomy compared with open esophagectomy, with pooled incidence of 6.0% versus 3.2%, respectively. Diaphragmatic herniation was more commonly seen following surgery for distal esophageal tumors. Majority of patients (64%) were symptomatic at diagnosis. Presentation within 30 days of operation occurred in 21% of cases and is twice as likely to require emergent repair with increased surgical morbidity. Early diaphragmatic herniation recurrence and cardiorespiratory complications are common sequelae following hernia repair.

CONCLUSIONS

In the era of MIA esophagectomy, one has to be cognizant of the increased risk of diaphragmatic herniation and its sequelae. Failure to recognize early diaphragmatic herniation can result in catastrophic consequences. Increased vigilance and decreased threshold for imaging during this period is warranted.

Factors resulting in postoperative dysphagia following esophagectomy: a narrative review

Esophagectomy is a technically involved surgery and can have significant postoperative morbidity. Although the mortality rate following esophagectomy has decreased in recent years, this surgical procedure has a relatively high complication rate compared to other surgeries to resect cancer. One of the most common complaints after esophagectomy is dysphagia. Dysphagia after esophagectomy can significantly affect quality of life. Dysphagia is a complication following esophagectomy that can lead to respiratory deterioration and death. The most common sites of postoperative dysphagia are the gastroesophageal anastomosis, gastric conduit, pylorus and the hiatus. Without appropriate treatment of dysphagia, malnutrition and dehydration can develop. These factors can lead to significant impacts to the overall health of a patient and increase mortality. A detailed literature review provided data to support diagnostic modalities and management strategies to treat postoperative dysphagia at these common areas. A systematic, evidence-based approach to diagnosis and treatment of postoperative dysphagia allows for prompt intervention and a decrease in morbidity and mortality. Treatment options for dysphagia vary, depending on the etiology. Based on the location and mechanism of dysphagia, options include stenting, dilation and surgical revision. Early treatment of dysphagia after esophagectomy can lessen the morbidity from this complication and improve quality of life.

Paraconduit Hiatal Hernia Following Esophagectomy: Incidence, Risk Factors, Outcomes and Repair

BACKGROUND

Paraconduit hiatal hernia (PCHH) is a known complication of esophagectomy with significant morbidity. PCHH may be more common with the transition to a minimally invasive approach and improved survival. We studied the PCHH occurrence following minimally invasive esophagectomy to determine the incidence, treatment, and associated risk factors.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed records of patients who underwent esophagectomy at an academic tertiary care center between 2013-2020. We divided the cohort into those who did and did not develop PCHH, identifying differences in demographics, perioperative characteristics and outcomes. We present video of our laparoscopic repair with mesh.

RESULTS

Of 49 patients who underwent esophagectomy, seven (14%) developed PCHH at a median of 186 d (60-350 d) postoperatively. They were younger (57 versus 64 y, P< 0.01), and in cases of resection for cancer, more likely to develop tumor recurrence (71% versus 23%, P= 0.02). There was a significant difference in 2-y cancer free survival of patients with a PCHH (PCHH 19% versus no hernia 73%, P< 0.01), but no significant difference in 5-y overall survival (PCHH 36% versus no hernia 68%, P= 0.18). Five of seven PCHH were symptomatic and addressed surgically. Four PCHH repairs recurred at a median of 409 d.

CONCLUSIONS

PCHH is associated with younger age and tumor recurrence, but not mortality. Safe repair of PCHH can be performed laparoscopically with or without mesh. Further studies, including systematic video review, are needed to address modifiable risk factors and identify optimal techniques for durable repair of post-esophagectomy PCHH.

Diaphragmatic herniation after esophagogastric surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

The anatomy of the esophageal hiatus is altered during esophagogastric surgery with an increased risk of postoperative hiatus hernia (HH). The purpose of this article was to examine the current evidence on the surgical management and outcomes associated with HH after esophagogastric surgery for cancer.

Materials and methods

Systematic review and meta-analysis. Web of Science, PubMed, and EMBASE data sets were consulted.

Results

Twenty-seven studies were included for a total of 404 patients requiring surgical treatment for HH after esophagogastric surgery. The age of the patients ranged from 35 to 85 years, and the majority were males (82.3%). Abdominal pain, nausea/vomiting, and dyspnea were the commonly reported symptoms. An emergency repair was required in 51.5%, while a minimally invasive repair was performed in 48.5%. Simple suture cruroplasty and mesh reinforced repair were performed in 65% and 35% of patients, respectively. The duration between the index procedure and HH repair ranged from 3 to 144 months, with the majority (67%) occurring within 24 months. The estimated pooled prevalence rates of pulmonary complications, anastomotic leak, overall morbidity, and mortality were 14.1% (95% CI = 8.0–22.0%), 1.4% (95% CI = 0.8–2.2%), 35% (95% CI = 20.0–54.0%), and 5.0% (95% CI = 3.0–8.0%), respectively. The postoperative follow-up ranged from 1 to 110 months (mean = 24) and the pooled prevalence of HH recurrence was 16% (95% CI = 13.0–21.6%).

Conclusions

Current evidence reporting data for HH after esophagogastric surgery is narrow. The overall postoperative pulmonary complications, overall morbidity, and mortality are 14%, 35%, and 5%, respectively. Additional studies are required to define indications and treatment algorithm and evaluate the best technique for crural repair at the index operation in an attempt to minimize the risk of HH.

Trans-hiatal herniation following esophagectomy or gastrectomy: retrospective single-center experiences with a potential surgical emergency

PURPOSE

Trans-hiatal herniation after esophago-gastric surgery is a potentially severe complication due to the risk of bowel incarceration and cardiac or respiratory complaints. However, measures for prevention and treatment options are based on a single surgeon´s experiences and small case series in the literature.

METHODS

Retrospective single-center analysis on patients who underwent surgical repair of trans-hiatal hernia following gastrectomy or esophagectomy from 01/2003 to 07/2020 regarding clinical symptoms, hernia characteristics, pre-operative imaging, hernia repair technique and perioperative outcome.

RESULTS

Trans-hiatal hernia repair was performed in 9 patients following abdomino-thoracic esophagectomy (40.9%), in 8 patients following trans-hiatal esophagectomy (36.4%) and in 5 patients following conventional gastrectomy (22.7%). Gastrointestinal symptoms with bowel obstruction and pain were mostly prevalent (63.6 and 59.1%, respectively), two patients were asymptomatic. Transverse colon (54.5%) and small intestine (77.3%) most frequently prolapsed into the left chest after esophagectomy (88.2%) and into the dorsal mediastinum after gastrectomy (60.0%). Half of the patients had signs of incarceration in pre-operative imaging, 10 patients underwent emergency surgery. However, bowel resection was only necessary in one patient. Hernia repair was performed by suture cruroplasty without (n = 12) or with mesh reinforcement (n = 5) or tension-free mesh interposition (n = 5). Postoperative pleural complications were most frequently observed, especially in patients who underwent any kind of mesh repair. Three patients developed recurrency, of whom two underwent again surgical repair.

CONCLUSION

Trans-hiatal herniation after esophago-gastric surgery is rare but relevant. The role of surgical repair in asymptomatic patients is disputed. However, early hernia repair prevents patients from severe complications. Measures for prevention and adequate closure techniques are not yet defined.

Transdiaphragmatic herniation after transthoracic esophagectomy: an underestimated problem

Diaphragmatic transposition of intestinal organs is a major complication after esophagectomy and can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This study aims of to analyze a large series of patients with this condition in a single high-volume center for esophageal surgery and to suggest a novel treatment algorithm. Patients who received surgery for postesophagectomy diaphragmatic herniation between October 2003 and December 2017 were included. Retrospective analysis of demographic, clinical and surgical data was performed. Outcomes of measure were initial clinical presentation, postoperative complications, in-hospital mortality and herniation recurrence. A total of 39 patients who had surgery for postesophagectomy diaphragmatic herniation were identified. Diaphragmatic herniation occurred after a median time of 259 days following esophagectomy with the highest prevalence between 1 and 12 months. A total of 84.6% of the patients had neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy prior to esophagectomy. The predominantly effected organ was the transverse colon (87.2%) prolapsing into the left hemithorax (81.6%). A total of 20 patients required emergency surgery. Surgery always consisted of reposition of the intestinal organs and closure of the hiatal orifice; a laparoscopic approach was used in 25.6%. Major complications (Dindo-Clavien ≥ IIIb) were observed in 35.9%, hospital mortality rate was 7.7%. Three patients developed recurrent diaphragmatic herniation during follow-up. Postesophagectomy diaphragmatic herniation is a functional complication of the late postoperative course and predominantly occurs in patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma having chemoradiation before Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. Due to a high rate of emergency surgery with life-threatening complications not a 'wait-and-see' strategy but early surgical repair may be indicated.

Hiatal hernia after oesophagectomy: a large European survey

OBJECTIVES

Hiatal hernias (HH) after oesophagectomy are rare, and their surgical management is not well standardized. Our goal was to report on the management of HH after oesophagectomy in high-volume tertiary European French-speaking centres.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicentre study among 19 European French-speaking departments of upper gastrointestinal and/or thoracic surgery. All patients scheduled or operated on for the repair of an HH after oesophagectomy were collected between 2000 and 2016. Demographics, details of the initial procedure, surgical management and long-term outcome were analysed.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine of 6608 (1.2%) patients who had oesophagectomies were included in the study. The postoesophagectomy diagnostic interval of an HH after oesophagectomy was ≤90 days (n = 17; 21%), 13 were emergency cases; between 91 days and 1 year, n = 21 (27%), 13 in emergency; ≥1 year, n = 41 (52%), 17 in emergency. The time to occurrence of HH after oesophagectomy was shorter after laparoscopy (median 308 days; interquartile range 150-693) compared to that after laparotomy (median 562 days, interquartile range 138-1768; P = 0.01). The incidence of HH after oesophagectomy was 0.73% (22/3010) after open surgery and 1.4% (26/1761) after laparoscopy (P = 0.03). Among the 79 patients, 78 were operated on: 35 had laparotomies (45%), 19 had laparoscopies (24%) and 24 (31%) had transthoracic approaches. Among the 43 urgent surgeries, 35 were open (25 laparotomies and 10 transthoracic approaches) and 8 were laparoscopies (conversion rate, 25%). Nine patients required bowel resections. Morbidity occurred in 36 (46%) patients with 1 postoperative death (1.2%). During the follow-up period, recurrent HH after oesophagectomy requiring revisional surgery developed in 8 (6 days-26 months) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical management of HH after oesophagectomy could be done by laparoscopy in patients with scheduled surgery but laparotomy or thoracotomy was preferred in urgent situations. The incidence of HH after oesophagectomy is higher and its onset earlier when laparoscopy is used at the initial oesophagectomy.

Hiatal Hernia after Esophagectomy: An Underappreciated Complication?

BACKGROUND

The natural history of hiatal herniation of small and/or large bowel post-esophagectomy (HHBPE) in the current era of improving long-term survival and evolving surgical technique is unknown. The aim of this study was to describe the rate and risk factors of HHBPE at our hospital.

METHODS

Patients undergoing esophagectomy between January 2011 and June 2017 were included if both follow-up information and axial imaging were available beyond 3 months post-esophagectomy. Patient characteristics, disease information, and treatment factors were all included in univariate analysis comparing patients with and without HHBPE, and multivariate regression was used to identify significant independent risk factors associated with HHBPE.

RESULTS

Of 310 esophagectomy patients analyzed, 258 patients were included in the study, with 79 patients (31%) showing evidence of an HHBPE and an overall median follow-up of 24 months; 44 of 79 patients (56%) had symptoms possibly referable to HHBPE and 17 of 79 patients (22%) underwent surgical repair. On univariate analysis, neoadjuvant therapy (n = 176), higher clinical stage, minimally invasive approach (n = 154), and transhiatal esophagectomy (n = 189) were significant predictors of HHBPE (p < 0.05). On multivariate analysis, neoadjuvant therapy and transhiatal approach remained significant independent predictors (p < 0.05). The rate of HHBPE was 44% in the 131 patients (51%) that had both factors.

CONCLUSIONS

HHBPE in the current era of neoadjuvant therapy and minimally invasive esophagectomy is common. HHBPE can cause gastrointestinal symptoms, but operation to repair HHBPE is uncommon on intermediate follow-up. Additional study and long-term follow-up are required to fully assess the impact of HHBPE and to potentially modify surgical practice to prevent or minimize HHBPE.

Diaphragmatic Hernia After Totally Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

This study aimed to investigate the occurrence of diaphragmatic hernia (DH) after totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) for gastric cancer. We reviewed retrospectively collected data from 490 consecutive patients who underwent TLTG (functional method, 365; overlap method, 125) for upper body gastric cancer, between January 2011 and May 2017, performed by a single surgeon. The median follow-up period was 40.6 months. Of 490 patients, 8 (1.63%) developed DH at a mean interval after TLTG of 7.3 (range, 3.4 to 12.8) months. All 8 patients were from the functional group, and presented with abdominal pain or vomiting. They were managed with emergency surgery (5 laparoscopic hernia reduction, 3 open hernia reduction). The grade of complication according to Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC) was CDC-III in 7 cases and CDC-IV in 1 case. There was no death associated with DH complications. None of the patients in the overlap group developed DH. The incidence of DH after TLTG is negligible in the overlap method. Therefore, the overlap method may be a safe reconstruction technique that can reduce the occurrence of DC after TLTG for gastric cancer.

Minimally Invasive and Robotic Esophagectomy: A Review

Great advances have been made in the surgical management of esophageal disease since the first description of esophageal resection in 1913. We are in the era of minimally invasive esophagectomy. The current three main approaches to an esophagectomy are the Ivor Lewis technique, McKeown technique, and the transhiatal approach to esophagectomy. These operations were associated with a high morbidity and mortality. The recent advances in minimally invasive surgical techniques have greatly improved the outcomes of these surgical procedures. This article reviews the literature and describes the various techniques available for performing minimally invasive esophagectomy and robot-assisted esophagectomies, the history behind the development of these techniques, the variations, and the contemporary outcomes after such procedures.

Laparoscopic repair of parahiatal hernia after esophagectomy: a case report

Background

Diaphragmatic hernia is a potential complication of esophagectomy, which usually occurs as a hiatal hernia and more frequently after minimally invasive esophagectomy. Parahiatal hernia is a rare form of diaphragmatic hernia, and to the best of our knowledge, parahiatal hernia after esophagectomy has not been previously reported. Here, we report a case of parahiatal hernia after esophagectomy that was successfully managed laparoscopically.

Case presentation

A 73-year-old man underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer with gastric tube reconstruction via the posterior mediastinum. Postoperative morbidity was ileus, which required conservative treatment, and intestinal obstruction for which operation with laparotomy was necessary. He was admitted with abdominal pain and vomiting at 15 months after esophagectomy. Abdominal X-ray revealed colon gas in the intrathoracic space. A barium enema examination showed a transverse colon incarcerated in the intrathoracic space. The patient was preoperatively diagnosed with hiatal hernia after esophagectomy, and laparoscopic hernia repair was performed. During the surgery, the hiatus was found to be intact, and the defect was clearly separated from the left crus of the diaphragm. Parahiatal hernia was the operative diagnosis. The incarcerated colon was repositioned in the abdominal cavity, and the defect was repaired using a composite mesh.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic surgery was found to be effective for the diagnosis and repair of parahiatal hernia.

Hiatal hernia after esophagectomy - a report of two cases

Postoperative hiatal hernia after esophagectomy occurs with a frequency of 0.4-6%, and the local conditions following esophagectomy promote its occurrence. In the material presented here, hiatal hernia in the form of displacement of the colon to the mediastinum was established in 0.78% (2/256) of all performed esophagectomies. Both cases were reoperated successfully.

Complex Esophageal Reconstruction Procedures Have Acceptable Outcomes Compared With Routine Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Complex esophageal reconstruction (CER) is defined as restoring esophageal continuity in a previously operated field, using a nongastric conduit, or after esophageal diversion. This study compares the outcomes of CER with non-CER (NCER), which uses an undisturbed stomach for reconstruction.

METHODS

This single-institution retrospective cohort study compares 75 CERs with 75 NCERs from 1995 to 2014 that were matched for cancer versus benign disease. Distributions of demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and complications were compared between CER and NCER. Odds of mortality at 30 and 90 days were calculated with logistic regression. Overall survival was illustrated with Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Although patients were similar in age, sex, and preoperative comorbidities, more non-white patients underwent CER (p = 0.04). Most NCER patients had adenocarcinoma (44%) or Barrett's high-grade dysplasia (39%); most CER patients had other benign disease (44%) or squamous cell carcinoma (24%, p < 0.01). CER had statistically significantly higher rates of reoperation, pneumonia, infection, and gastrointestinal complications, and longer median length of stay than NCER. Odds of mortality for CER and NCER at 30 days (odds ratio [OR] 1.0, 95% CI: 0.1 to 16.3), 90 days (OR 2.6, 95% CI: 0.5 to 13.9) and overall (adjusted hazard ratio 1.56, 95% CI: 0.9 to 2.7) were not statistically significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with NCER, CER patients had higher rates of return to the operating room, more postoperative infections and gastrointestinal complications, and longer length of stay. However, 30-day, 90-day, and overall survival were similar. CER should be offered to patients with acceptable risks and anticipated long-term survival.

Hiatal Herniation After Transhiatal Esophagectomy: an Underreported Complication

INTRODUCTION

The incidence and presentation of hiatal hernias after esophagectomy (HHAE) are not well characterized, and may be changing with increased survival from esophageal cancer. The aims of this study were to define the incidence and presentation of HHAE in our population of patients undergoing transhiatal esophagectomy (THE), as it may have implications for management.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study (2004-2013) was performed of esophageal cancer patients who underwent THE. To determine the presence or absence of HHAE independent of the original radiology report, a radiologist sub-specializing in body imaging independently reviewed post-operative computed tomography images. A time-to-event competing risk analysis was performed to estimate the cumulative incidence of HHAE.

RESULTS

Among 192 patients, the two-year cumulative incidence of HHAE was 14 % (95 % confidence interval 7.5-21 %). Of the 22 patients determined to have HHAE by independent expert radiologist review, only 11 (50 %) were identified by the original interpreting radiologist. Seven patients were symptomatic, and each underwent hiatal hernia repair (4 via laparotomy, 3 via laparoscopy).

CONCLUSION

HHAE is not rare and is often unrecognized. As more patients with esophageal cancer survive, the number of patients becoming symptomatic and requiring repair may also rise. Therefore, it is important to consider this diagnosis when following patients long-term after esophagectomy.

Diaphragmatic hernia following oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer - Are we too radical?

BACKGROUND

Diaphragmatic herniation (DH) of abdominal contents into the thorax after oesophageal resection is a recognised and serious complication of surgery. While differences in pressure between the abdominal and thoracic cavities are important, the size of the hiatal defect is something that can be influenced surgically. As with all oncological surgery, safe resection margins are essential without adversely affecting necessary anatomical structure and function. However very little has been published looking at the extent of the hiatal resection. We aim to present a case series of patients who developed DH herniation post operatively in order to raise discussion about the ideal extent of surgical resection required.

METHODS

We present a series of cases of two male and one female who had oesophagectomies for moderately and poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas of the lower oesophagus who developed post-operative DH. We then conducted a detailed literature review using Medline, Pubmed and Google Scholar to identify existing guidance to avoid this complication with particular emphasis on the extent of hiatal resection.

DISCUSSION

Extended incision and partial resection of the diaphragm are associated with an increased risk of postoperative DH formation. However, these more extensive excisions can ensure clear surgical margins. Post-operative herniation can be an early or late complication of surgery and despite the clear importance of hiatal resection only one paper has been published on this subject which recommends a more limited resection than was carried out in our cases.

CONCLUSION

This case series investigated the recommended extent of hiatal dissection in oesophageal surgery. Currently there is no clear guidance available on this subject and further studies are needed to ascertain the optimum resection margin that results in the best balance of oncological parameters vs. post operative morbidity.