SAGES guidelines for the surgical treatment of hiatal hernias.

BACKGROUND: Hiatal hernia (HH) is a common condition. A multidisciplinary expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations to support clinicians, patients, and others in decisions regarding the treatment of HH. METHODS: Systematic reviews were conducted for four key questions regarding the treatment of HH in adults: surgical treatment of asymptomatic HH versus surveillance; use of mesh versus no mesh; performing a fundoplication versus no fundoplication; and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) versus redo fundoplication for recurrent HH. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations methodology by subject experts. When the evidence was insufficient to base recommendations on, expert opinion was utilized instead. Recommendations for future research were also proposed. RESULTS: The panel provided one conditional recommendation and two expert opinions for adults with HH. The panel suggested routinely performing a fundoplication in the repair of HH, though this was based on low certainty evidence. There was insufficient evidence to make evidence-based recommendations regarding surgical repair of asymptomatic HH or conversion to RYGB in recurrent HH, and therefore, only expert opinions were offered. The panel suggested that select asymptomatic patients may be offered surgical repair, with criteria outlined. Similarly, it suggested that conversion to RYGB for management of recurrent HH may be appropriate in certain patients and again described criteria. The evidence for the routine use of mesh in HH repair was equivocal and the panel deferred making a recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations should provide guidance regarding surgical decision-making in the treatment of HH and highlight the importance of shared decision-making and consideration of patient values to optimize outcomes. Pursuing the identified research needs will improve the evidence base and may allow for stronger recommendations in future evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of HH.

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

INTRODUCTION: Reinforcement of crural closure with synthetic resorbable mesh has been proposed to decrease recurrence rates after hiatal hernia repair, but continues to be controversial. This systematic review aims to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and intermediate-term results of using biosynthetic mesh to augment the hiatus. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed throughout this systematic review. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions and Risk of Bias in Randomized Trials tools were used to perform qualitative assessment of all studies included in this review. Recommendations were then summarized for the following pre-defined key items: protocol, research question, search strategy, study eligibility, data extraction, study design, risk of bias, publication bias, and statistical analysis. RESULTS: The systematic literature search found 520 articles, 101 of which were duplicates and 355 articles were determined to be unrelated to our study and excluded. The full text of the remaining 64 articles was thoroughly assessed. A total of 18 articles (1846 patients) were ultimately included for this review, describing hiatal hernia repair using three different biosynthetic meshes-BIO-A, Phasix ST, and polyglactin mesh. Mean operative time varied from 127 to 223 min. Mean follow up varied from 12 to 54 months. There were no mesh erosions or explants. One mesh-related complication of stenosis requiring reoperation was reported with BIO-A. Studies showed significant improvement in symptom and quality-of-life scores, as well as satisfaction with surgery. Recurrence was reported as radiologic or clinical recurrence. Overall, recurrence rate varied from 0.9 to 25%. CONCLUSION: The use of biosynthetic mesh is safe and effective for hiatal hernia repair with low complications rates and high symptom resolution. The reported recurrence rates are highly variable due to significant heterogeneity in defining and evaluating recurrences. Further randomized controlled trials with larger samples and long-term follow-up should be performed to better analyze outcomes and recurrence rates.

Novel "starburst" mesh configuration for paraesophageal and recurrent hiatal hernia repair: comparison with keyhole mesh configuration.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists over the use of mesh, its type and configuration in repair of hiatal hernia. We have used biological mesh for large or recurrent hiatal hernias. We have developed a mesh configuration to better enhance the tensile strength of the hiatus by folding the mesh over the edge of the hiatus-entitled the "starburst" configuration. We report our experience with the starburst configuration, comparing it to our results with the keyhole configuration. METHODS: Medical records of all patients undergoing either the keyhole or starburst mesh configuration hiatal hernia repair were reviewed between 2017 and 2021. Data gathered included age, sex, type of hernia (sliding, paraesophageal, or recurrent), fundoplication type (none, Nissen, Toupet, Dor, Collis-Nissen, Collis-Toupet, or magnetic sphincter augmentation [MSA]), 30-day complications, and long-term outcomes (hiatal hernia recurrence, reflux-symptom recurrence, dysphagia, dilations, reoperations). RESULTS: From 7/2017 to 8/2019, 51 cases using the keyhole mesh were completed. Sliding hiatal hernia comprised 4%, paraesophageal hernia (PEH) 64% and recurrent hiatal hernia (RHH) 34% of cases. Distribution of fundoplication type: 2% none, 41% Nissen, 41% Toupet, 8% Dor, 2% Collis-Nissen, and 6% Collis-Toupet. 30-day complication rate 31%. Long-term outcomes: recurrent hiatal hernia 16%, dysphagia 12%, dysphagia requiring dilation(s) 10%, recurrent GERD symptoms 4%, and reoperation 14%. From 10/2020 to 8/2021, 58 cases using the starburst configuration were completed. PEH comprised 60% and RHH 40%. Distribution of fundoplication type: 10% none, 40% Nissen, 43% Toupet, 5% MSA, 2% Collis-Toupet. 30-day complication rate 16%. Long-term outcomes: recurrent hiatal hernia 19%, dysphagia 14%, dilations 5%, recurrent GERD symptoms 9%, and reoperations 3%. CONCLUSION: The starburst mesh configuration compares favorably with the keyhole configuration with respect to postoperative dysphagia, need for esophageal dilation, and GERD symptom recurrence, with similar recurrence rates. We are continuing to further refine this technique and study the long-term outcomes.

Does crural repair with biosynthetic mesh improve outcomes of revisional surgery for recurrent hiatal hernia?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic revisional surgery for recurrent hiatal hernia (HH) is technically demanding. Re-recurrences are common and esophageal hiatus mesh reinforcement might improve durability of the repair, thus minimizing the risk of re-herniation. PURPOSE: Assess safety and effectiveness of simple suture repair (no mesh group) vs. crural augmentation with a biosynthetic absorbable mesh (mesh group) in patients with recurrent HH. METHODS: Observational retrospective study from September 2012 to December 2022. Only patients undergoing redo surgery for previous failures of hiatal hernia repair were enrolled. Surgical failure was defined as symptomatic recurrent HH with > 2 cm of gastric tissue above the diaphragmatic impression at upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and/or swallow study. Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease Health-Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL) and Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaires were used to assess and preoperative and postoperative symptoms and quality of life. RESULTS: One hundred four patients were included. Overall, 60 patients (57.7%) underwent mesh-reinforced cruroplasty, whereas 44 (42.3%) underwent simple suture cruroplasty. Mesh and no mesh groups had similar baseline demographics, symptoms, prevalence of esophagitis and Barrett's esophagus, and HH size. A composite crural repair was most commonly performed in the mesh group (38.3% vs. 20.5%; p = 0.07). In addition to cruroplasty, most patients (91%) underwent a Toupet fundoplication. The 90-day postoperative complication rate was 8.6%, and there was no mortality. Recurrent HH was diagnosed in 21 patients (20.2%) with a clinical trend toward reduced incidence in the mesh group (16.7% vs. 25%; p = 0.06). Compared to baseline, there was a statistically significant improvement of median GERD-HRQL score (p < 0.01) and all SF-36 items (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic revisional surgery for recurrent HH is safe and effective. Selective use of biosynthetic mesh may protect from early recurrence and has the potential to reduce re-herniation in the long-term.

Laparoscopic reoperative antireflux surgery: A safe procedure with high patient satisfaction and low morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic reoperative antireflux surgery remains challenging and the advantages compared to an open approach remain unclear. METHODS: Retrospective chart review and follow-up questionnaire via phone. RESULTS: 50 reoperative hiatal hernia repairs were performed in 47 patients. VALUES: median and interquartile range (IQR). There were 10 males, 37 females, 55 (49-66) years. Reoperative procedures: 38 laparoscopic vs. 12 open transabdominal. Length of operation: 185 (147-254) vs. 325 (276-394) minutes (p < 0.0008). Length of stay: 3 (2-4) vs.10 (8-13) days (p < 0.0001). None required Collis gastroplasty. There was no 30-day mortality. Follow-up questionnaire was obtained in 36/45 (80%) at 21 (11-40) months (2 cancer related deaths). In all, 24/36 (67%) were free of preoperative symptoms and 33/36 (92%) were satisfied with the operation. There was no difference between the laparoscopic and open group. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic reoperative antireflux surgery is a safe approach with high patient satisfaction and low morbidity. Tension-free esophageal length can be achieved laparoscopically without Collis gastroplasty. The duration of the operation and length of stay are less in the laparoscopic vs. open group. Symptomatic relief and patient satisfaction are similar in both approaches.

Hernia hiatal recidivante: la visión del cirujano: Revisión de la literatura / Literature Review: A Surgeon’s View of Recurrent Hiatal Hernia

Las hernias hiatales recidivantes constituyen una patología común que generan un reto diagnóstico y terapéutico para cirujanos y gastroenterólogos. Generalmente se presentan de forma asintomática o con síntomas atípicos y se asocian a factores fisiológicos, propios del paciente y de la técnica quirúrgica. Su tratamiento es complejo y dependiendo de la causa de los síntomas pueden requerir manejo médico o quirúrgico. En este artículo, se pretenden definir pautas para la identificación y manejo de esta patología, así como establecer claves para el tratamiento desde un enfoque quirúrgico.

Recurrent hiatal hernias are a common pathology that generate a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge for surgeons and gastroenterologists. They are generally asymptomatic or present with atypical symptoms and are associated with the patient’s own physiological factors and the surgical technique. Treatment is complex and, depending on the cause of the symptoms, will require either medical or surgical management. This article starts from a surgical approach to define guidelines for identification and management of this condition and to establish keys to treatment.