Antireflux surgery in patients with gastroesophageal reflux but a negative 24-hour pH study: late outcomes.

PURPOSE: Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease often undergo a 24-hour pH test to confirm pathologic reflux before surgery. However, a negative pH test can occur in some individuals with reflux, and a case might still be made for antireflux surgery based on symptoms of reflux even in the absence of endoscopic esophagitis. The long-term outcomes in patients who underwent antireflux surgery despite negative preoperative test results were determined. METHODS: Patients were selected from a prospective database. A total of 745 patients met the inclusion criteria, which included typical esophageal reflux symptoms, absence of a large hiatus hernia, preoperative 24-hour pH study performed, endoscopy, and postoperative symptom and satisfaction follow-up available at 5 years. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on 24-hour pH study and endoscopy results: negative pH and negative endoscopy (n = 65), negative pH and positive endoscopy (n = 72), and positive pH (n = 608). The negative pH and negative endoscopy group underwent surgery based on clinical assessment and typical esophageal reflux symptoms. Baseline and follow-up outcomes at 5 years were evaluated using 0 to 10 analog scores, which assessed heartburn, dysphagia, and satisfaction with the overall outcome. Data were analyzed to compare the groups. RESULTS: The groups were well matched for demographics and preoperative symptom scores. At the median 5-year follow-up, clinical outcome scores were similar among the groups for heartburn, dysphagia, and overall satisfaction. The mean heartburn scores were 1.80 in the negative pH and negative endoscopy group, 1.88 in the negative pH and positive endoscopy group, and 1.91 in the positive pH group (P = .663). The mean satisfaction scores were high in all groups: 8.13, 7.31, and 7.72, respectively (P = .293). CONCLUSION: No difference in clinical outcome scores was observed. The negative pH and negative endoscopy group had high satisfaction scores and low heartburn and dysphagia scores. Our findings support antireflux surgery in well-selected symptomatic patients with a negative preoperative pH test.

Quality of life following repair of large hiatal hernia is not influenced by the use of mesh-Longer-term follow-up from a randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: The use of prosthetic mesh in laparoscopic repair of large hiatus hernias remains controversial. Clinical and quality of life outcomes from a randomized controlled trial of mesh versus suture repair previously showed few differences at early follow-up. This study evaluated longer-term quality of life outcomes from that trial. METHODS: A prospective, multicentre, double blind randomized controlled trial assessed three methods of repair for large hiatus hernias: sutures-only versus absorbable mesh versus non-absorbable mesh. Quality of life was assessed using the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire which was completed preoperatively and then at 3, 6, 12 months following surgery and annually thereafter. SF-36 outcomes were compared across the three repair techniques at longer-term follow-up (3-6 years), and to earlier baseline and 12-month outcomes. RESULTS: 126 patients were randomized; 43-suture-only, 41-absorbable mesh and 42-non-absorbable mesh. Questionnaires were completed by 118 patients preoperatively, 115 at 12 months and 98 at longer-term follow-up (median 5 years). There were no significant differences between the repair techniques for the subscale and composite scores at longer-term follow-up. The mental component score improved significantly after surgery and was sustained across follow-up for all techniques. The physical component score also improved significantly but was lower at longer-term follow-up compared to the 12-month follow up in both mesh groups. CONCLUSION: Surgical repair of large hiatus hernias provides sustained long-term improvement in quality of life. The addition of mesh does not improve quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12605000725662.

Mucosal impedance as a diagnostic tool for gastroesophageal reflux disease: an update for clinicians.

Mucosal impedance is a marker of esophageal mucosal integrity and a novel technique for assessing esophageal function and pathology. This article highlights its development and clinical application for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), Barrett's esophagus, and eosinophilic esophagitis. A narrative review of key publications describing the development and use of mucosal impedance in clinical practice was conducted. A low mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI) has been shown to be an independent predictor of response to anti-reflux therapy. MNBI predicts medication-responsive heartburn better than distal esophageal acid exposure time. Patients with equivocal evidence of GERD using conventional methods, with a low MNBI, had an improvement in symptoms following the initiation of PPI therapy compared to those with a normal MNBI. A similar trend was seen in a post fundoplication cohort. Strong clinical utility for the use of mucosal impedance in assessing eosinophilic esophagitis has been repeatedly demonstrated; however, there is minimal direction for application in Barrett's esophagus. The authors conclude that mucosal impedance has potential clinical utility for the assessment and diagnosis of GERD, particularly when conventional investigations have yielded equivocal results.

Quantifying Perioperative Risks for Antireflux and Hiatus Hernia Surgery: A Multicenter Cohort Study of 4301 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Using a comprehensive Australian cohort, we quantified the incidence and determined the independent predictors of intraoperative and postoperative complications associated with antireflux and hiatus hernia surgeries. In addition, we performed an in-depth analysis to understand the complication profiles associated with each independent risk factor. BACKGROUND: Predicting perioperative risks for fundoplication and hiatus hernia repair will inform treatment decision-making, hospital resource allocation, and benchmarking. However, available risk calculators do not account for hernia anatomy or technical aspects of surgery in estimating perioperative risk. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all elective antireflux and hiatus hernia surgeries in 36 Australian hospitals over 10 years. Hierarchical multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the independent predictors of intraoperative and postoperative complications accounting for patient, surgical, anatomic, and perioperative factors. RESULTS: A total of 4301 surgeries were analyzed. Of these, 1569 (36.5%) were large/giant hernias and 292 (6.8%) were revisional procedures. The incidence rates of intraoperative and postoperative complications were 12.6% and 13.3%, respectively. The Charlson Comorbidity Index, hernia size, revisional surgery, and baseline anticoagulant usage independently predicted both intraoperative and postoperative complications. These risk factors were associated with their own complication profiles. Finally, using risk matrices, we visualized the cumulative impact of these 4 risk factors on the development of intraoperative, overall postoperative, and major postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: This study has improved our understanding of perioperative morbidity associated with antireflux and hiatus hernia surgery. Our findings group patients along a spectrum of perioperative risks that inform care at an individual and institutional level.

Assessment of laparoscopic fundoplication with endoscopy: room for improvement.

INTRODUCTION: Gastroesophageal reflux disease affects a significant portion of the Australian and world population. Minimally invasive laparoscopic fundoplication is a highly effective treatment in appropriately selected patients, with a 90% satisfaction rate. However, up to 5% will undergo revisional surgery. Endoscopy is an important investigation in the evaluation of persistent or new symptoms after fundoplication. Our study sought to evaluate the inter-rater reliability and variability in assessing fundoplication with endoscopy. METHODS: Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) surgeons and gastroenterologists were invited to join the cohort study through their professional membership with two societies based in Australia. Participants completed a two part 25-item multiple choice questionnaire, involving the analysis of ten static endoscopic images post-fundoplication. RESULTS: A total of 101 participants were included in the study (64 UGI surgeons and 37 gastroenterologists). Over 95% of participants were consultant level, working in non-rural tertiary hospitals. Total accuracy for all 10 cases combined was 76% for UGI surgeons and 69.9% for gastroenterologists. In three of the 10 cases, UGI surgeons performed significantly better than gastroenterologists (p < 0.05). When assessing performance across each of the 4 questions for each case, UGI surgeons were more accurate than gastroenterologists in describing the integrity of the wrap (p = 0.014). Inter-rater reliability was low across both groups for most domains (kappa < 1). CONCLUSION: Our study confirms low inter-rater reliability between endoscopists and large variations in reporting. UGI surgeons performed better than gastroenterologists in certain cases, usually when describing the integrity of the fundoplication. Our study provides further support for the use of a standardized reporting system in post-fundoplication patients.

Pre-existing hiatal mesh increases morbidity during and after revisional antireflux surgery: A retrospective multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Revisional antireflux surgery, including hiatus hernia repair, is increasingly common. Mesh-augmented hiatal closure at the time of index operation is controversial but commonly performed. Although a meta-analysis of randomized data has demonstrated no additional benefit of routine mesh placement, it is unclear whether this practice results in harm, particularly at the time of revisional antireflux surgery. We determined whether pre-existing mesh at the hiatus increases morbidity during and after revisional antireflux surgery. METHODS: Analysis of prospectively-maintained databases of all elective revisional antireflux surgery cases in 36 hospitals across Australia took place over 10 years. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of patients with and without prior hiatal mesh were compared. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to validate primary findings. RESULTS: A total of 346 revisional cases (35 with pre-existing mesh) were analyzed. The 2 groups had comparable baseline characteristics. In total, 77 (22.2%) patients had 148 intraoperative adverse events. Pre-existing mesh was associated with a higher risk of intraoperative complications (48.6% vs 22.5%, odds ratio 3.25, 95% confidence interval 1.63-6.38, P = .002), secondary to bleeding, and lacerations to pleura, lung, and liver. Overall, 63 (18.2%) patients developed postoperative complications. Pre-existing mesh was associated with increased postoperative morbidity (37.1% vs 16.1%, odds ratio 3.09, 95% confidence interval 1.50-6.43, P = .005), particularly due to bleeding and respiratory complications. Importantly, pre-existing mesh independently predicted the occurrence of intraoperative and postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Prior hiatal mesh significantly increases morbidity during and after revisional antireflux surgery. Given that revisional surgery is increasingly being performed, our findings discourage routine mesh use during primary antireflux surgery.

DAta Linkage to Enhance Cancer Care (DaLECC): Protocol of a Large Australian Data Linkage Study.

Cancer is a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality, accounting for 250 Disability-Adjusted Life Years and 10 million deaths in 2019. Minimising unwarranted variation and ensuring appropriate cost-effective treatment across primary and tertiary care to improve health outcomes is a key health priority. There are few studies that have used linked data to explore healthcare utilisation prior to diagnosis in addition to post-diagnosis patterns of care. This protocol outlines the aims of the DaLECC project and key methodological features of the linked dataset. The primary aim of this project is to explore predictors of variations in pre- and post-cancer diagnosis care, and to explore the economic and health impact of any variation. The cohort of patients includes all South Australian residents diagnosed with cancer between 2011 and 2020, who were recorded on the South Australian Cancer Registry. These cancer registry records are being linked with state and national healthcare databases to capture health service utilisation and costs for a minimum of one-year prior to diagnosis and to a maximum of 10 years post-diagnosis. Healthcare utilisation includes state databases for inpatient separations and emergency department presentations and national databases for Medicare services and pharmaceuticals. Our results will identify barriers to timely receipt of care, estimate the impact of variations in the use of health care, and provide evidence to support interventions to improve health outcomes to inform national and local decisions to enhance the access and uptake of health care services.

Understanding Potentially Preventable Mortality Following Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Surgery: Analysis of a National Audit of Surgical Mortality.

INTRODUCTION: At a national level, understanding preventable mortality after oesophago-gastric cancer surgery can direct quality-improvement efforts. Accordingly, utilizing the Australian and New Zealand Audit of Surgical Mortality (ANZASM), we aimed to: (1) determine the causes of death following oesophago-gastric cancer resections in Australia, (2) quantify the proportion of potentially preventable deaths, and (3) identify clinical management issues contributing to preventable mortality. METHODS: All in-hospital mortalities following oesophago-gastric cancer surgery from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2020 were analysed using ANZASM data. Potentially preventable and non-preventable cases were compared. Thematic analysis with a data-driven approach was used to classify clinical management issues. RESULTS: Overall, 636 complications and 123 clinical management issues were identified in 105 mortalities. The most common causes of death were cardio-respiratory in aetiology. Forty-nine (46.7%) deaths were potentially preventable. These cases were characterized by higher rates of sepsis (59.2% vs 33.9%, p = 0.011), multiorgan dysfunction syndrome (40.8% vs 25.0%, p = 0.042), re-operation (63.3% vs 41.1%, p = 0.031) and other complications compared with non-preventable mortality. Potentially preventable mortalities also had more clinical management issues per patient [median (IQR): 2 (1-3) vs 0 (0-1), p < 0.001), which adversely impacted preoperative (30.6% vs 7.1%, p = 0.002), intraoperative (18.4% vs 5.4%, p = 0.037) and postoperative (51.0% vs 17.9%, p < 0.001) care. Thematic analysis highlighted recurrent areas of deficiency with preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative patient management. CONCLUSIONS: Almost 50% of deaths following oesophago-gastric cancer resections were potentially preventable. These were characterized by higher complication rates and clinical management issues. We highlight recurrent themes in patient management to improve future quality of care.

A Method for Increasing the Robustness of Stable Feature Selection for Biomarker Discovery in Molecular Medicine Developed Using Serum Small Extracellular Vesicle Associated miRNAs and the Barrett's Oesophagus Disease Spectrum.

The biomarker development field within molecular medicine remains limited by the methods that are available for building predictive models. We developed an efficient method for conservatively estimating confidence intervals for the cross validation-derived prediction errors of biomarker models. This new method was investigated for its ability to improve the capacity of our previously developed method, StaVarSel, for selecting stable biomarkers. Compared with the standard cross validation method, StaVarSel markedly improved the estimated generalisable predictive capacity of serum miRNA biomarkers for the detection of disease states that are at increased risk of progressing to oesophageal adenocarcinoma. The incorporation of our new method for conservatively estimating confidence intervals into StaVarSel resulted in the selection of less complex models with increased stability and improved or similar predictive capacities. The methods developed in this study have the potential to improve progress from biomarker discovery to biomarker driven translational research.

Para-conduit diaphragmatic hernia following esophagectomy-the new price of minimally invasive surgery?

Esophageal Cancer is the seventh commonest cancer worldwide with poor overall survival. Significant morbidity related to open esophagectomy has driven practice toward hybrid, totally minimally invasive and robotic procedures. With the increase in minimally invasive approaches, it has been suggested that there might be an increased incidence of subsequent para-conduit diaphragmatic hernia. To assess the incidence, modifiable risk factors and association with operative approach of this emerging complication, we evaluated outcomes following esophagectomy from two Australian Centers. Prospectively collected databases were examined to identify patients who developed versus did not develop a para-conduit hernia. Patient characteristics, disease factors, treatment factors, operative and post-operative factors were compared for these two groups. A total of 24 of 297 patients who underwent esophagectomy were diagnosed with a symptomatic para-conduit diaphragmatic hernia (8.1%). The significant risk factor for hernia was a minimally invasive abdominal approach (70.8% vs. 35.5%; P = 0.004, odds ratio = 12.876, 95% CI 2.214-74.89). Minimally invasive thoracic approaches were not associated with increased risk. Minimally invasive abdominal approaches to esophagectomy doubled the risk of developing a para-conduit diaphragmatic hernia. Effective operative solutions to address this complication are required.

Successful Expulsion of a Golf Ball from the Sigmoid Colon Using Volume Laxatives.

Background: Rectal foreign bodies form a surprisingly frequent cause of presentation to the emergency department. The materials inserted constitute a wide range of size, shape, and texture with each presenting a unique set of challenges. Despite a seemingly innocuous presentation, if not recognised early and managed accordingly, significant complications can develop including obstruction, perforation, and sphincteric injury. The existing doctrines advocate endoscopic intervention after simple measures fail and advise against the use of laxative therapy due to concerns for complications that may arise. The authors of this study challenge this notion, provided certain conditions are met. Case Presentation. We report the case of a 14-year-old boy who inserted a golf ball into his rectum, which subsequently migrated proximally into the sigmoid colon on plain radiographic films. The patient was asymptomatic on presentation, and there was no clinical evidence of bowel injury or mechanical bowel obstruction. Endoscopic removal of the golf ball was pursued under general anaesthesia. Despite protracted efforts, the golf ball was not able to be retrieved endoscopically. In an attempt to avoid aggressive surgery, volume laxatives were administered with successful passage of the golf ball several hours later. Conclusions: This case discusses the unique technical challenges, which may be encountered when attempting to retrieve a large, spherical, and non-confirming foreign body entrapped above the rectosigmoid junction and how these factors can complicate endoscopic retrieval. The authors advocate that in the absence of a mechanical bowel obstruction, patients with foreign bodies possessing physical properties that are amenable to spontaneous passage, a trial of strong aperients, should be considered first line. The author's contention is that direct escalation to removal of foreign body in theatre can be resource draining and may expose the patient to additional risk.

Planned oesophagectomy after chemoradiotherapy versus salvage oesophagectomy following definitive chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oesophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer and sixth leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Salvage oesophagectomies are associated with an increased risk of mortality, although recent data suggests that long-term survival rates following salvage oesophagectomy are similar to planned oesophagectomy. The aim was therefore to meta-analyse outcomes for patients undergoing salvage versus planned oesophagectomies to assess the differences in short-term mortality and long-term survival. METHODS: A systematic review of Medline, Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed was performed to identify relevant studies. Data were extracted and compared by meta-analysis, using odds ratio and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Nineteen studies meeting inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis, which compared patients in the planned oesophagectomy group (n = 23 555) to patients in the salvage oesophagectomy group (n = 2227). There were significant differences between the groups in terms of rates of postoperative mortality (5.7% salvage oesophagectomy versus 3.1% planned oesophagectomy, P = 0.0004), anastomotic leak (20.6% salvage oesophagectomy versus 14.5% planned oesophagectomy, P < 0.00001), pulmonary complications (37.1% salvage oesophagectomy versus 24.2% planned oesophagectomy, P < 0.0001) and R0 margin (87.6% salvage oesophagectomy versus 91.3% planned oesophagectomy, P < 0.0001). There was no statistical difference between long-term survival rates at 5 years with 39.2% for salvage and 42.6% for planned oesophagectomy (P = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Salvage oesophagectomies do offer a meaningful chance of long-term survival (at 5 years) for select patients with oesophageal cancer, but the elevated risk of post-operative complications and mortality following salvage oesophagectomy should be recognized.

Risk Factors, Diagnosis and Management of Chyle Leak Following Esophagectomy for Cancers: An International Consensus Statement.

This Delphi exercise aimed to gather consensus surrounding risk factors, diagnosis, and management of chyle leaks after esophagectomy and to develop recommendations for clinical practice. Background: Chyle leaks following esophagectomy for malignancy are uncommon. Although they are associated with increased morbidity and mortality, diagnosis and management of these patients remain controversial and a challenge globally. Methods: This was a modified Delphi exercise was delivered to clinicians across the oesophagogastric anastomosis collaborative. A 5-staged iterative process was used to gather consensus on clinical practice, including a scoping systematic review (stage 1), 2 rounds of anonymous electronic voting (stages 2 and 3), data-based analysis (stage 4), and guideline and consensus development (stage 5). Stratified analyses were performed by surgeon specialty and surgeon volume. Results: In stage 1, the steering committee proposed areas of uncertainty across 5 domains: risk factors, intraoperative techniques, and postoperative management (ie, diagnosis, severity, and treatment). In stages 2 and 3, 275 and 250 respondents respectively participated in online voting. Consensus was achieved on intraoperative thoracic duct ligation, postoperative diagnosis by milky chest drain output and biochemical testing with triglycerides and chylomicrons, assessing severity with volume of chest drain over 24 hours and a step-up approach in the management of chyle leaks. Stratified analyses demonstrated consistent results. In stage 4, data from the Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit demonstrated that chyle leaks occurred in 5.4% (122/2247). Increasing chyle leak grades were associated with higher rates of pulmonary complications, return to theater, prolonged length of stay, and 90-day mortality. In stage 5, 41 surgeons developed a set of recommendations in the intraoperative techniques, diagnosis, and management of chyle leaks. Conclusions: Several areas of consensus were reached surrounding diagnosis and management of chyle leaks following esophagectomy for malignancy. Guidance in clinical practice through adaptation of recommendations from this consensus may help in the prevention of, timely diagnosis, and management of chyle leaks.

Phase 1 trial of intraperitoneal paclitaxel in combination with intravenous cisplatin and oral capecitabine in patients with advanced gastric cancer and peritoneal metastases (IPGP study).

AIMS: Gastric cancer with peritoneal involvement has a poor prognosis. Intraperitoneal (IP) paclitaxel has shown promising results in these patients. However, this approach has only been studied in the Asian population, and in combination with S-1. We investigated the maximum tolerated dose of IP paclitaxel, with a standard chemotherapy combination, in the Australian population. METHODS: The study of the population included metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negative gastric adenocarcinoma with peritoneal involvement. Treatment included six 21-day cycles of cisplatin (80 mg/m2 IV, day 1) plus capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 PO BD, days 1-14) plus IP paclitaxel (days 1 and 8). IP paclitaxel doses for cohort 1-3 were 10, 20, and 30 mg/m2 , respectively, in a 3 + 3 standard dose-escalation design. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were enrolled of which 6 were female and the median age was 63. Two patients developed dose-limiting toxicities. No grade 4/5 toxicities were recorded. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Therefore, as defined by the study protocol, the recommended phase-2 dose for IP paclitaxel was determined to be 30 mg/m2 . The 12-month survival rate was 46.7%, and the median survival was 11.5 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 15.3-6.9). CONCLUSIONS: IP paclitaxel is safe in combination with cisplatin and capecitabine and the recommended phase-2 dose is 30 mg/m2 .

Partial Fundoplication is Effective Treatment for Female Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux and Scleroderma: A Multicenter Comparative Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with scleroderma often suffer from dysphagia and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Partial fundoplication is a validated anti-reflux procedure for GERD but may worsen dysphagia in scleroderma patients. Its utility in these patients is unknown. Here, we evaluate the efficacy and acceptability of partial fundoplication for the treatment of medically refractory GERD in patients with scleroderma. METHODS: Analysis of a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent fundoplication across 14 hospitals between 1991 and 2019. Perioperative outcomes, reintervention rates, heartburn, dysphagia, and patient satisfaction were assessed at 3 months, 1- and 3-years post-surgery. RESULTS: A total of 17 patients with scleroderma were propensity score matched to 526 non-scleroderma controls. All underwent a partial fundoplication. Perioperative outcomes including complication rate, length of stay, and need for reoperation were similar between the two groups. Compared to baseline, both groups reported significantly improved heartburn at 3 months, 1- and 3-years following partial fundoplication. Surgery was equally effective at controlling heartburn across all follow-up timepoints in patients with or without scleroderma. Dysphagia to solids was more common in patients with scleroderma than controls at 3-months post-surgery, but was not significantly different to controls at 1- and 3-year follow-up. Satisfaction scores were high and comparable between both groups across all postoperative timepoints, with 100% of patients with scleroderma reporting that their initial choice to undergo surgery was correct. CONCLUSIONS: Partial fundoplication controls reflux and is associated with a transient period of dysphagia to solids in patients with scleroderma. This approach is safe, effective and acceptable for patients with scleroderma and medically refractory GERD.

Routine Esophagograms After Hiatus Hernia Repair Minimizes Reoperative Morbidity: A Multicenter Comparative Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the utility of routine esophagograms after hiatus hernia repair and its impact on patient outcomes. BACKGROUND: Hiatus hernia repairs are common. Early complications such asre-herniation, esophageal obstruction and perforation, although infrequent, incur significant morbidity. Whether routine postoperative esophagograms enable early recognition of these complications, expedite surgical management, reduce reoperative morbidity, and improve functional outcomes are unclear. METHODS: Analysis of a prospectively-maintained database of hiatus hernia repairs in 14 hospitals, and review of esophagograms in this cohort. Results: A total of 1829 hiatus hernias were repaired. Of these, 1571 (85.9%) patients underwent a postoperative esophagogram. Overall, 1 in 48 esophagograms resulted in an early (<14 days) reoperation, which was undertaken in 44 (2.4%) patients. Compared to those without an esophagogram, patients who received this test before reoperation (n = 37) had a shorter time to diagnosis (2.4 vs 3.9 days, P = 0.041) and treatment (2.4 vs 4.3 days, P = 0.037) of their complications. This was associated with lower rates of open surgery (10.8% vs 42.9%, P = 0.034), gastric resection (0.0% vs 28.6%, P = 0.022), postoperative morbidity (13.5% vs 85.7%, P < 0.001), unplanned intensive care admission (16.2% vs 85.7%, P < 0.001), and decreased length-of-stay (7.3 vs 18.3 days, P = 0.009). Furthermore, we identified less intraoperative and postoperative complications, and superior functional outcomes at 1-year follow-up in patients who underwent early reoperations for an esophagogram-detected asymptomatic re-herniation than those who needed surgery for late symptomatic recurrences. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative esophagograms decrease the morbidity associated with early and late reoperations, and should be considered for routine use after hiatus hernia surgery.

Sutured Versus Mesh-augmented Hiatus Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis systematically reviewed published randomized control trials comparing sutured versus mesh-augmented hiatus hernia (HH) repair. Our primary endpoint was HH recurrence at short- and long-term follow-up. Secondary endpoints were: surgical complications, operative times, dysphagia and quality of life. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Repair of large HHs is increasingly being performed. However, there is no consensus for the optimal technique for hiatal closure between sutured versus mesh-augmented (absorbable or nonabsorbable) repair. METHODS: A systematic review of Medline, Scopus (which encompassed Embase), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and PubMed was performed to identify relevant studies comparing mesh-augmented versus sutured HH repair. Data were extracted and compared by meta-analysis, using odds ratio and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Seven randomized control trials were found which compared mesh-augmented (nonabsorbable mesh: n = 296; absorbable mesh: n = 92) with sutured repair (n = 347). There were no significant differences for short-term hernia recurrence (defined as 6-12 months, 10.1% mesh vs 15.5% sutured, P = 0.22), long-term hernia recurrence (defined as 3-5 years, 30.7% mesh vs 31.3% sutured, P = 0.69), functional outcomes and patient satisfaction. The only statistically significant difference was that the mesh repair required a longer operation time (P = 0.05, OR 2.33, 95% confidence interval 0.03-24.69). CONCLUSIONS: Mesh repair for HH does not offer any advantage over sutured hiatal closure. As both techniques deliver good and comparable clinical outcomes, a suture only technique is still an appropriate approach.