Laparoscopic prosthetic hiatal reinforcement for large hiatal hernia repair

Mesh-related complications in paraoesophageal repair: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Paraoesophageal hernias (PEH) have a high recurrence rate, prompting surgeons to consider the use of mesh reinforcement of the hiatus. The risks and benefits of mesh augmentation in PEH repair are debated. Mesh-related complications including migration and erosion are considered in this publication.

DESIGN

A systematic literature review of articles published between 1970 and 2019 in Medline, OVID, Embase, and Springer database was conducted, identifying case reports, case series and observational studies of PEH repair reporting mesh-related complications.

RESULTS

Thirty-five case reports/series of 74 patients and 20 observational studies reporting 75 of 4200 patients with mesh complications have been included. The incidence of mesh-related erosions in this study is 0.035%. PTFE, ePTFE, composite and synthetic meshes were frequently associated with mesh erosion requiring intervention. Complete erosions are often managed endoscopically while partial erosions may require surgery and resection of the oesophagus and/or stomach.

CONCLUSIONS

Mesh-related complication is rare with dysphagia a common presenting feature. Mesh erosion is associated with synthetic mesh more frequently in the reported literature. A mesh registry with long-term longitudinal data would help in understanding the true incidence of mesh-related complications.

Reparación laparoscópica de hernia hiatal gigante

Introducción. La reparación laparoscópica es el estándar de tratamiento en hernia hiatal gigante. Sin embargo, a pesar de su baja morbilidad, la tasa de recurrencia sigue siendo alta. Nuestro objetivo fue describir los resultados de la reparación laparoscópica de hernia hiatal gigante, independientemente de la técnica de cruroplastia empleada. Métodos. Se llevó a cabo un estudio retrospectivo de pacientes llevados a reparación laparoscópica de hernia hiatal gigante en el periodo 2009-2017. Se analizaron los datos demográficos, la técnica quirúrgica, las complicaciones y la estancia hospitalaria. Se revisaron los resultados de la endoscopia, la radiografía de vías digestivas altas y la escala de síntomas GERD-HRQOL, obtenidos luego de un año de cirugía. Resultados. Se incluyeron 44 pacientes con un tamaño promedio de la hernia de 7 cm. Se practicó cruroplastia con sutura simple en 36,4 %, sutura más refuerzo con politetrafluoroetileno (PTFE) o dacrón, en 59,1 %, y se usó malla en 4,5 %. Hubo 12 complicaciones, la estancia hospitalaria promedio fue de 3,5 días y no hubo mortalidad. Se encontró recurrencia endoscópica o radiológica en 6/20 pacientes, todas pequeñas y asintomáticas. En 23 pacientes, la escala GERD-HRQOL reportó un valor promedio de 7,7 y 78 % de satisfacción. Solo un paciente requirió cirugía de revisión. Conclusión. El método preferido de reparación laparoscópica de la hernia hiatal gigante es la cruroplastia sin malla, técnica asociada a baja morbilidad y adecuado control de los síntomas. La tasa de recurrencia es similar a la reportada en la literatura. Se requieren estudios prospectivos con seguimiento completo a largo plazo para validar estos resultados.

Assessment of short-term outcome with TiO2 mesh in laparoscopic repair of large paraesophageal hiatal hernias

Background

Laparoscopic large para-oesophageal hiatal hernia (LPHH) repair using mesh reinforcement significantly reduces postoperative recurrence rates compared to conventional suture repair, especially within short follow-up times. However, the ideal strategy for repairing LPHH remains disputable because no clear guidelines are given regarding indications, mesh type, shape or position. The aim of this study was to survey our short-term results of LPHH management with a biosynthetic monofilament polypropylene mesh coated with titanium dioxide to enhance biocompatibility (TiO₂Mesh™).

Methods

A retrospective study was performed at Ramon y Cajal University Hospital, Spain from December 2014 to October 2018. Data were collected on 27 consecutive patients with extensive hiatal hernia defects greater than 5 cm for which a laparoscopic repair was performed by primary suture and additional reinforcement with a TiO₂Mesh™. Study outcomes were investigated, including clinical and radiological recurrences, dysphagia and mesh-related drawbacks.

Results

Twenty-seven patients were included in our analysis; 10 patients were male, and 17 were female. The mean age was 73 years (range, 63–79 years). All operations were performed laparoscopically. The median postoperative hospital stay was 3 days. After a mean follow-up of 18 months (range, 8-29 months), only 3 patients developed clinical recurrence of reflux symptoms (11%), and 2 had radiological recurrences (7%). No mesh-related complications occurred.

Conclusions

TiO₂Mesh™ was found to be safe for laparoscopic repair of LPHH with a fairly low recurrence rate in this short-term study. Long-term studies conducted over a period of years with large sample sizes will be essential for confirming whether this mesh is suitable as a standard method of care with few drawbacks.

A collective review of biological versus synthetic mesh-reinforced cruroplasty during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication

Background:

Laparoscopic cruroplasty and fundoplication have become the gold standard in the treatment of hiatal hernia and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The use of a mesh-reinforcement of the cruroplasty has been proven effective; although, there is a lack of evidence considering which type of mesh is superior. The aim of this study was to compare recurrence rates after mesh reinforced cruroplasty using biological versus synthetic meshes.

Methods:

We performed a systematic review of all clinical trials published between January 2004 and September 2015 describing the application of a mesh in the hiatal hernia repair during Nissen fundoplication for both GERD and hiatal hernia. The primary outcome was the recurrence rate, and secondary outcomes were complication rate, mortality and symptomatic outcome.

Results:

We included 16 studies and extracted data regarding 1089 mesh operated patients of whom 385 received a biological mesh and 704 a synthetic mesh. The mean follow-up was 53.4 months. The recurrence rate in the synthetic mesh group was 6.8% compared to 16.1% in the biological mesh group (P < 0.05). The complication rate was 5.1% and 4.6% (P = 0.694), respectively, and there were 12 mesh-related complications. No mesh-related mortality was reported.

Conclusion:

Mesh reinforcement of hiatal hernia repair seems safe in the short-term follow-up. The available literature suggests no clear advantage of biological over synthetic meshes. Regarding cost-efficiency and short-term results, the use of synthetic nonabsorbable meshes might be advocated.

Tension-Free Inlay Repair of Large Hiatal Hernias Using Dual-Sided Composite PTFE/ePTFE Meshes in Laparoscopic Surgery for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) also frequently suffer from concomitant hiatal hernia. It has been described that a preoperative hiatal hernia of ≥3 cm is associated with a more than threefold relative risk for reflux symptom recurrence after fundoplication without mesh reinforcement. In this report, we describe our experience with the implantation of dual-sided composite PTFE/ePTFE meshes in a tension-free fashion during laparoscopic antireflux surgery (LARS).

METHODS

A prospective database containing data of all patients undergoing LARS and hiatal hernia repair with mesh implantation from January 2009 until December 2014 was interrogated. Ten patients with preoperative esophageal high resolution manometry and 24-hour pH impedance monitoring because of symptoms suggestive of GERD who received hiatal repair using dual-sided meshes in inlay technique were identified and included in this analysis.

RESULTS

There were no conversions to open surgery in the study group. Median operative time was 138 minutes (interquartile range Q1-Q3: 119-151 minutes) and average length of postoperative stay was 3.5 days (interquartile range Q1-Q3: 2.3-4.0 days). During a median follow-up period of 43.3 months (interquartile range Q1-Q3: 18.9-47.1 months), no redo operations had to be performed. Noteworthy, 2 patients complained about dysphagia (20%) during follow-up, but symptoms resolved after endoscopic interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Tension-free inlay repair of large hiatal hernias using dual-sided composite PTFE/ePTFE meshes during LARS provides promising results. It provides satisfactory symptom relief and prolonged control of GERD. Further studies to validate its efficiency in a larger collective are needed.

Dual mesh repair for a large diaphragmatic hernia defect: An unusual case report

•

Delayed right sided of diaphragm rupture or hernia is a rare.

•

Most of the diaphragmatic hernia patients are asymptomatic.

•

The main treatment approach is repair of the diaphragmatic hernia defect after reduction of the organs and tissues into the abdominal cavity.

•

A dual mesh repair can be used for a large diaphragm hernia.

Introduction

Diaphragmatic hernia secondary to traumatic rupture is a rare entity which can occur after stab wound injuries or blunt abdominal traumas. We aimed to report successfully management of dual mesh repair for a large diaphragmatic defect.

Case report

A 66-year-old male was admitted with a right sided diaphragmatic hernia which occurred ten years ago due to a traffic accident. He had abdominal pain with worsened breath. Chest X-ray showed an elevated right diaphragm. Further, thoraco-abdominal computerized tomography detected herniation a part of the liver, gallbladder, stomach, and omentum to the right hemi-thorax. It was decided to diaphragmatic hernia repair. After an extended right subcostal laparotomy, a giant right sided diaphragmatic defect measuring 25 × 15 cm was found in which the liver, gallbladder, stomach and omentum were herniated. The abdominal organs were reducted to their normal anatomic position and a dual mesh graft was laid to close the diaphragmatic defect. Patients’ postoperative course was uneventful.

Discussion

Diaphragmatic hernia secondary to trauma is more common on the left side of the diaphragm (left/right = 3/1). A right sided diaphragmatic hernia including liver, stomach, gallbladder and omentum is extremely rare. The main treatment of diaphragmatic hernias is primary repair after reduction of the herniated organs to their anatomical position. However, in the existence of a large hernia defect where primary repair is not possible, a dual mesh should be considered.

Conclusion

A dual mesh repair can be used successfully in extensive large diaphragmatic hernia defects when primary closure could not be achieved.

Laparoscopic repair of hiatus hernia: Does mesh type influence outcome? A meta-analysis and European survey study

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.

Functional Results after Repair of Large Hiatal Hernia by Use of a Biologic Mesh

BACKGROUND

The aim of this observational study is to analyze the results of patients with large hiatal hernia and upside-down stomach after surgical closure with a biological mesh (Permacol(®), Covidien, Neustadt an der Donau, Germany). Biological mesh is used to prevent long-term detrimental effects of artificial meshes and to reduce recurrence rates.

METHODS

A total of 13 patients with a large hiatal hernia and endothoracic stomach, who underwent surgery between 2010 and 2014, were included. Interviews and upper endoscopy were conducted to determine recurrences, lifestyle restrictions, and current complaints.

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up of 26 ± 18 months (range: 3-58 months), 10 patients (3 men, mean age 73 ± 13, range: 26-81 years) were evaluated. A small recurrent axial hernia was found in one patient postoperatively. Dysphagia was the most common complaint (four cases); while in one case, the problem was solved after endoscopic dilatation. In three cases, bloat and postprandial pain were documented. In one case, an explantation of the mesh was necessary due to mesh migration and painful adhesions. In one further case with gastroparesis, pyloroplasty was performed without success. The data are compared to the available literature. It was found that dysphagia and recurrence rates are unrelated both in biological and in synthetic meshes if the esophagus is encircled. In series preserving the esophagus at least partially uncoated, recurrences after the use of biological meshes relieve dysphagia. After the application of synthetic meshes, dysphagia is aggravated by recurrences.

CONCLUSION

Recurrence is rare after encircling hiatal hernia repair with the biological mesh Permacol(®). Dysphagia, gas bloat, and intra-abdominal pain are frequent complaints. Despite the small number of patients, it can be concluded that a biological mesh may be an alternative to synthetic meshes to reduce recurrences at least for up to 2 years. Our study demonstrates that local fibrosis and thickening of the mesh can affect the outcome being associated with abdominal discomfort despite a successful repair. The review of the literature indicates comparable results after 2 years with both biologic and synthetic meshes embracing the esophagus. At the same point in time, reconstruction with synthetic and biologic materials differs when the esophagus is not or only partially encircled in the repair. This is important since encircling artificial meshes can erode the esophagus after 5-10 years.

Robotic giant hiatal hernia repair: 3 year prospective evaluation and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

While conventional laparoscopic repair for giant hiatal hernias is considered difficult, robotic technology is likely to result in an improved postoperative course.

METHODS

We prospectively analysed patients with giant hiatal hernias who underwent robotic repair during a 3 year period. Preoperative data, operative variables, complications, clinical outcomes and anatomical recurrence after 1 year were evaluated.

RESULTS

Six patients with giant hiatal hernias underwent robotic repair using the Da Vinci surgical system. The mean operative time was 182 min. The mean hospital stay was 6 days. No patients required reoperation for disease recurrence, and all claimed the absence of postoperative symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic approaches can minimize surgical trauma in patients with giant hiatal hernias and result in favourable outcomes in terms of anatomical recurrence and quality of life. With the availability of the da Vinci System, all patients with giant hiatal hernias can be offered a minimally invasive surgical option.

Reoperative intervention in patients with mesh at the hiatus is associated with high incidence of esophageal resection--a single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Mesh hiatoplasty is a widely debated topic among foregut surgeons. While short-term outcomes tout decreased recurrence rates, an increase in mesh-related complications has been reported. The aim of this study is to present a single-center experience with reoperative intervention in patients with previous mesh at the hiatus.

METHODS

After institutional review board approval, a prospectively maintained database was retrospectively queried to identify patients who underwent reoperative intervention between 2003 and spring of 2013 and had mesh placed at a previous hiatal hernia procedure. Patient charts were reviewed and data variables collected.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients (mean age of 56.7 ± 18.3; 19 females) who underwent 27 procedures met the inclusion criteria. Synthetic mesh was placed in 15 (56 %) procedures, while the remaining 12 had biologic mesh. The mean interval between reoperative intervention and previous surgery was 33 months. Dysphagia (56 %) was the most common presentation, while three patients had mesh erosion. Recurrent hiatus hernia (2 to 7 cm) was noted in 19 (70 %) patients. Eight patients (30 %) underwent redo fundoplication, six patients (22 %) were converted to Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy, two patients (7.4 %) underwent distal esophagectomy with esophagojejunostomy, five patients (19 %) had subtotal esophagectomy with gastric pull-up, and one patient underwent substernal gastric pull-up for esophageal bypass with interval esophagectomy. The mean operative time was 252 ± 71.7 min, and the median blood loss was 150 ml (range, 50-1,650 ml). There was no postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSION

Reoperative intervention in patients with mesh at the hiatus is associated with a high need for esophageal resection. More than two thirds of the patients also had a recurrent hiatal hernia.

Initial Outcomes of Laparoscopic Paraesophageal Hiatal Hernia Repair with Mesh

The use of mesh in laparoscopic paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair (LHR) may reduce the risk of late hernia recurrence. The aim of this study was to evaluate initial outcomes and recurrence rate of 92 patients who underwent LHR reinforced with a synthetic bioabsorbable mesh. Surgical approaches included LHR and Nissen fundoplication (n = 64), LHR without fundoplication (n = 10), reoperative LHR (n = 9), LHR with a bariatric operation (n = 6), and emergent LHR (n = 3). The mean length of hospital stay was 2 ± 3 days (range, 1 to 30 days). There were no conversions to open laparotomy and no intraoperative complications. One of 92 patients (1.1%) required intensive care unit stay. The 90-day mortality was zero. Minor complications occurred in 3.3 per cent, major complications in 2.2 per cent, and late complications in 5.5 per cent of patients. There were no perforations or early hernia recurrence. The 30-day reoperation rate was 1.1 per cent. For patients with available 1-year follow-up, the overall recurrence rate was 18.5 per cent with a mean follow-up of 30 months (range, 12 to 51 months). LHR repair with mesh is associated with low perioperative morbidity and no mortality. The use of bioabsorbable mesh appears to be safe with no early hiatal hernia recurrence or late mesh erosion. Longer follow-up is needed to determine the long-term rate of hernia recurrence associated with LHR with mesh.

Dual-sided composite mesh repair of hiatal hernia: Our experience and a review of the Chinese literature

AIM: To summarize our experience in the application of Crurasoft^® for antireflux surgery and hiatal hernia (HH) repair and to introduce the work of Chinese doctors on this topic.

METHODS: Twenty-one patients underwent HH repair with Crurasoft^® reinforcement. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and HH-related symptoms including heartburn, regurgitation, chest pain, dysphagia, and abdominal pain were evaluated preoperatively and 6 mo postoperatively. A patient survey was conducted by phone by one of the authors. Patients were asked about “recurrent reflux or heartburn” and “dysphagia”. An internet-based Chinese literature search in this field was also performed. Data extracted from each study included: number of patients treated, hernia size, hiatorrhaphy, antireflux surgery, follow-up period, recurrence rate, and complications (especially dysphagia).

RESULTS: There were 8 type I, 10 type II and 3 type III HHs in this group. Mean operative time was 119.29 min (range 80-175 min). Intraoperatively, length and width of the hiatal orifice were measured, (4.33 ± 0.84 and 2.85 ± 0.85 cm, respectively). Thirteen and eight Nissen and Toupet fundoplications were performed, respectively. The intraoperative complication rate was 9.52%. Despite dysphagia, GERD-related symptoms improved significantly compared with those before surgery. The recurrence rate was 0% during the 6-mo follow-up period, and long-term follow-up disclosed a recurrence rate of 4.76% with a mean period of 16.28 mo. Eight patients developed new-onset dysphagia. The Chinese literature review identified 12 papers with 213 patients. The overall recurrence rate was 1.88%. There was no esophageal erosion and the rate of dysphagia ranged from 0% to 24%.

CONCLUSION: The use of Crurasoft^® mesh for HH repair results in satisfactory symptom control with a low recurrence rate. Postoperative dysphagia continues to be an issue, and requires more research to reduce its incidence.

Mesh in laparoscopic large hiatal hernia repair: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

The use of mesh is becoming more popular for large hiatal hernia (type II-IV) repair to reduce the recurrence rate. The aim of this study was to outline the currently available literature on the use of mesh in laparoscopic large hiatal hernia repair, emphasizing objective outcome.

METHODS

A structured search of the literature was performed in the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. There were three randomized controlled trials, seven prospective and five retrospective cohort studies, and five prospective and one retrospective case-control study. The study design was not reported in the remaining studies. In the included studies, laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair was performed with mesh in 924 patients (mesh group) and without mesh in 340 patients (nonmesh group). The type of mesh used was very different: polypropylene in six, biomesh in nine, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) in two, expanded PTFE (ePTFE) in two, and composite polypropylene-PTFE in another two. At least two different kinds of mesh were used in five studies. Radiological and/or endoscopic follow-up was performed after a mean (± SEM) period of 25.2 ± 4.0 months. There was no or only a small recurrence (recurrent hiatal hernia <2 cm) in 385 of the 451 available patients (85.4 %) in the mesh group and in 182 of 247 (73.7 %) in the nonmesh group.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of mesh in the repair of large hiatal hernias is promising with respect to the reduction of anatomical recurrences. However, many different kinds and configurations of mesh are available. This systematic review of the literature is a basis for high-quality randomized controlled trials to obtain the most effective and safe mesh in the long term.