Impact of Operative Times and Mesh Utilization on Paraesophageal Hernia Repair: Analysis of 30-Day Outcomes from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Database

Analysis of Rates, Causes, and Risk Factors for 90-Day Readmission After Surgery for Large Hiatal Hernia: A Two-Center Study

Background: Hospital readmissions have become a more examined indicator of surgical care delivery and quality. There is scarcity of data in the literature on the rate, risk factors, and most common reasons of readmission following major hiatal hernia surgery. The primary endpoint was 90-day readmission after surgery for large hiatal hernia. Secondary endpoint was to examine which characteristics related with a higher risk of readmission. Methods: A retrospective review of two distinct institutional databases was performed for patients who had surgery for a large hiatal hernia between January 2012 and December 2019. Demographic, perioperative, and outpatient data were collected from the medical record. Results: A total of 71 patients met the inclusion criteria, most of them suffering from a type III hernia (66.2%). Mean operative time was 146 (±56.5) minutes and median length of stay (LOS) was 6 days (interquartile range = 3). The overall morbidity was 21.1% and the in-hospital mortality was 1.4%. The 30- and 90-day readmission rates were 7% and 8.5%, respectively. The mean time to readmission was 14.3 (±15.6) days. The reasons for 90-day hospital readmission were dysphagia (50%), pneumonia (16.7%), congestive heart failure (16.7%), and bowel obstruction (16.7%). Grade of esophagitis ≥2, presence of Barrett's esophagus, and LOS longer than 8 days were significant risk factors for unplanned readmission within 90 days. Conclusion: We observed that about 6 out of 71 patients who had surgery readmitted within 90 days (8.5%). Readmissions were most often linked to esophagitis ≥2, presence of Barrett's esophagus, and LOS longer than 8 days. These findings point to the necessity for focused treatments before, during, and after hospitalization to decrease morbidity and extra costs in this high-risk population.

Non-closure of the Free Peritoneal Flap During Laparoscopic Hernia Repair of Lower Abdominal Marginal Hernia: A Retrospective Analysis

Background: During lower abdominal marginal hernia repair, the peritoneal flap is routinely freed to facilitate mesh placement and closed to conclude the procedure. This procedure is generally called trans-abdominal partial extra-peritoneal (TAPE). However, the necessity of closing the free peritoneal flap is still controversial. This study aimed to investigate the safety and feasibility of leaving the free peritoneal flap in-situ. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on 68 patients (16 male, 52 female) who underwent laparoscopic hernia repair between June 2014 and March 2021. Patients were diagnosed as the lower abdominal hernia and all required freeing the peritoneal flap during the operation. Patients were divided into 2 groups: one group was TAPE group with the closed free peritoneal flap, another group left the free peritoneal flap unclosed. Analyses were performed to compare both intraoperative parameters and postoperative complications. Results: There were no significant differences in demographic, comorbidity, hernia characteristics and ASA classification. The intra-operative bleeding volume, visceral injury, hospital stay, urinary retention, visual analog scale (VAS) score, dysuria, intestinal obstruction, surgical site infection, mesh infection, recurrence rate and hospital stay were similar among the two groups. Mean operative time of the flap closing procedure was higher than for patients with the free peritoneal flap left in-situ (p = 0.002). Comparisons of postoperative complications showed flap closure resulted in a higher incidence of seroma formation (p = 0.005). Conclusion: Providing a barrier-coated mesh is used during laparoscopic lower abdominal marginal hernia repair, it is safe to leave the free peritoneal flap in-situ and this approach may prevent the occurrence of seromas.

Paraesophageal Hernia Repair: How I Do It

Although the results of a laparoscopic repair of a paraesophageal hernia are convincing and accepted, controversies still persist regarding indications for elective repair, the need for a concurrent fundoplication, the use of mesh, and the need for a Collis gastroplasty. This article is a description of our surgical approach to the patient with a paraesophageal hernia in need of a repair.

Octogenarians exhibit quality of life improvement but increased morbidity after paraesophageal hernia repair

BACKGROUND

The benefit of elective laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair (eLPEHR) in the elderly is unclear. This study compared quality of life and symptom resolution and morbidity after eLPEHR between octogenarians and younger patients.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted comparing octogenarians (n = 23) to younger patients (n = 162) undergoing eLPEHR. Primary outcomes were pre and post-operative disease-specific quality of life (GERD-HRQL) and symptom scales (GERSS) and post-operative morbidity and length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

Octogenarians presented with higher ASA and lower preoperative BMI. Compared to controls, octogenarians exhibited higher overall morbidity (34.8% vs 16.1%, p = 0.03), including cardiac events (8.7% vs 0.6%) and mortality (8.7% vs 0%), and longer LOS (3 vs 2 days, p < 0.005). Post-operative reduction in GERD-HRQL/GERSS scores was comparable between groups.

CONCLUSION

Octogenarians who undergo eLPEHR exhibit significant improvement in quality of life and symptom burden but may experience increased morbidity, suggesting a role for watchful waiting in this population.

SUMMARY

Symptom burden, quality of life, and immediate post-operative morbidity was compared between octogenarians and younger patients undergoing elective laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair at a single institution. While exhibiting comparable post-operative improvement in symptom burden and quality of life, octogenarians experience higher post-operative morbidity. This may suggest a role for watchful waiting in the elderly population.

Laparoscopic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair and Pulmonary Embolism

OBJECTIVE

Pulmonary embolism (PE) following laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair (PEHR) is rare but occurs at a higher frequency than other laparoscopic procedures. We describe a series of patients who developed PEs after PEHR in hopes of capturing potential risk factors for further study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five cases of PE after PEHR were observed between 2017 and 2018. Individual and perioperative risk factors, and postoperative courses were reviewed.

RESULTS

Patients had a mean age of 73 years (range, 59 to 86). All were female. Two patients presented acutely. Three patients underwent revisional surgery. The average procedure duration was 248 minutes (range, 162 to 324). All patients had gastrostomy tubes placed. The diagnosis of PE occurred within 3 to 19 days postoperatively. Four were treated with 3 months of oral anticoagulation; 1 was managed expectantly.

CONCLUSIONS

Highly complex cases, marked by revisional status, need for mesh, large hernia size, and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement are likely at increased risk for PEs. Preoperative venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis should be considered in the majority of laparoscopic PEHR patients.

Mesh reinforcement of paraesophageal hernia repair: Trends and outcomes from a national database

BACKGROUND

Placement of paraesophageal type of "mesh" in paraesophageal hernia repair is controversial. This study examines the trends and outcomes of mesh placement in paraesophageal hernia repair.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried for patients who underwent paraesophageal hernia repair with or without mesh (2010-2017). Demographics, operative approach, and outcomes were compared over time.

RESULTS

Of 25,801, most paraesophageal hernia repair cases were elective (89.3%), without mesh (61.9%), and performed laparoscopically (91.3%).When compared with open paraesophageal hernia repair patients, the patients undergoing laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair had lesser rates of reoperation, readmission, mortality, overall complications and major complications (2.7% vs 4.8%, 6.2% vs 9.6%, 0.6% vs 2.9%, 7.1% vs 21.3%, 3.8% vs 11.1%, respectively; all P < .0001). Mesh placement was more common in laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair (38.9 vs 29.7, P < .0001) than opern paraesophageal hernia repair. During 2010-2017, mesh placement decreased from 46.2% to 35.2% of laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair (P < .0001). Operative times for laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair decreased over time, and laparoscpic paraesophageal hernia repair without mesh was consistently less (with mesh: 176.0 ± 71.0 to 149.9 ± 72.5 min, without mesh: 148.6 ± 71.4 to 134.6 ± 70.4). We observed no changes in comorbidities or adverse outcomes over time. Using multivariate analysis to control for potential confounding factors, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was associated most strongly with adverse outcomes, including mortality (OR 2.53, CI 1.55-4.14), any complications (OR 1.80, CI 1.51-2.16), major complications (OR 1.80, CI 1.51-2.16), readmission (OR 1.63, CI 1.33-1.99) and reoperation (OR 1.49, CI 1.10-2.02). Mesh placement was not associated with adverse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The placement of mesh during laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair is not associated with adverse outcomes. Use of mesh with laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair is decreasing with no apparent adverse impact on short-term patient outcomes. Further research is needed to investigate patient factors not captured by this national database, such as characteristics of the hernia, patient symptoms, and hernia recurrence.

Who gets a PEG? An analysis of simultaneous PEG placement during elective laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) is an infrequent adjunct in elective paraesophageal hernia repair (PEHR). Guidelines denote that PEG "may facilitate postoperative care in selected patients." Though there is sparse literature defining which patients may benefit. The purpose of this study is to determine factors associated with simultaneous PEG placement during PEHR and their subsequent outcomes.

METHODS

The NSQIP database was queried from 2011 to 2016 for patients undergoing elective laparoscopic PEHR. Cases were excluded if PEHR or fundoplasty was not the primary procedure, a concomitant bariatric procedure was performed, or if the primary surgeon was not a general or cardiothoracic surgeon. Groups were Propensity Score Matched for age, BMI, and ASA Class.

RESULTS

15700 patients were identified, 371 who underwent simultaneous PEG placement (2.4%). Non-PEG patients were matched at a 5:1 ratio, producing 1855 controls. PEG patients had higher rates of pre-operative dyspnea (OR 1.45, p = 0.0110), pre-operative weight loss (OR 2.87, p = 0.0001), and lower pre-operative albumin (3.92 vs. 4.01, p = 0.0129). PEG patients had more intra-operative contamination (mean Wound Classification 1.54 vs. 1.38, p < 0.0001) and longer case durations (170 vs. 148 min, p < 0.0001). PEG patients had longer lengths of stay (3.4 vs. 2.5 days, p = 0.0001), rates of superficial SSI (OR 5.82, p = 0.0012), peri-operative transfusions (OR 2.68, p = 0.0197), and pulmonary emboli (OR 3.61, p = 0.0359).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing simultaneous PEG during PEHR are more likely to have respiratory symptoms, markers of malnutrition, and intra-operative factors indicative of more technically challenging cases. These patients have longer hospitalizations, higher rates of superficial SSI, and more pulmonary emboli.