Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Equal patient satisfaction, quality of life and objective recurrence rate after laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair with and without mesh

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair has become standard practice for most surgeons performing antireflux surgery. Hiatal hernia repair consists of cruroplasty with sutures only or additional reinforcement using mesh. Use of mesh was initiated to reduce recurrence rates. Recent analyses show that use of mesh may influence radiologic recurrence rates, but it does not seem to prevent symptomatic recurrences and the need for reoperation. This study compares clinical and radiologic outcomes of primary cruroplasty and cruroplasty with non-absorbable mesh after laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of prospectively followed cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic correction of hiatal hernia type II–IV in two tertiary referral centers was carried out. Radiologic recurrence, symptomatic recurrence, reoperation rate, complications and patient-reported outcome measures were analyzed for all patients.

Results

A total of 189 patients were analyzed after laparoscopic hiatal hernia correction with an additional fundoplication [127 (67.2%) primary correction, 62 (32.8%) with mesh reinforcement]. After a mean follow-up of 39.3 months, the overall radiologic recurrence rate was 24.3%, which was equal in both groups [25.8% (mesh) vs 23.6% (no mesh), P = 0.331]. Symptomatic recurrence rate was 13.2% (16.1 vs 11.8%, P = 0.495) and reoperation rate 7.4% (9.7 vs 6.3%), which was comparable between the two groups. Complication rates were equal, and no serious mesh-related complications were reported. Health-related quality of life improved after surgery, dysphagia decreased and patient satisfaction was high for both groups without significant differences.

Conclusion

Radiologic recurrences, symptomatic recurrences and reoperation rates are equal after laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair with or without non-absorbable mesh reinforcement, irrespective of hernia size and type. Quality of life, dysphagia and patient satisfaction were comparable. No serious mesh-related complications occurred. The results of this study do not support the routine use of mesh in hiatal hernia repair.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Engstrom C, Cai W, Irvine T et al (2012) Twenty years of experience with laparoscopic antireflux surgery. Br J Surg 99(10):1415–1421

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lal DR, Pellegrini CA, Oelschlager BK (2005) Laparoscopic repair of paraesophageal hernia. Surg Clin North Am 85(1):105–118, x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Grotenhuis BA, Wijnhoven BP, Bessell JR, Watson DI (2008) Laparoscopic antireflux surgery in the elderly. Surg Endosc 22(8):1807–1812

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wijnhoven BP, Watson DI (2008) Laparoscopic repair of a giant hiatus hernia—how I do it. J Gastrointest Surg. 12(8):1459–1464

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Edye M, Salky B, Posner A, Fierer A (1998) Sac excision is essential to adequate laparoscopic repair of paraesophageal hernia. Surg Endosc 12(10):1259–1263

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Watson DI, Davies N, Devitt PG, Jamieson GG (1999) Importance of dissection of the hernial sac in laparoscopic surgery for large hiatal hernias. Arch Surg 134(10):1069–1073

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Watson DI, Thompson SK, Devitt PG et al (2015) Laparoscopic repair of very large hiatus hernia with sutures versus absorbable mesh versus nonabsorbable mesh: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 261(2):282–289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hashemi M, Peters JH, DeMeester TR et al (2000) Laparoscopic repair of large type III hiatal hernia: Objective followup reveals high recurrence rate. J Am Coll Surg 190(5):553–560 (discussion 560-1)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Aly A, Munt J, Jamieson GG, Ludemann R, Devitt PG, Watson DI (2005) Laparoscopic repair of large hiatal hernias. Br J Surg 92(5):648–653

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stylopoulos N, Gazelle GS, Rattner DW (2002) Paraesophageal hernias: Operation or observation? Ann Surg 236(4):492–500 (discussion 500-1)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Carlson MA, Richards CG, Frantzides CT (1999) Laparoscopic prosthetic reinforcement of hiatal herniorrhaphy. Dig Surg 16(5):407–410

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Frantzides CT, Madan AK, Carlson MA, Stavropoulos GP (2002) A prospective, randomized trial of laparoscopic polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) patch repair vs simple cruroplasty for large hiatal hernia. Arch Surg 137(6):649–652

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Granderath FA, Schweiger UM, Kamolz T, Asche KU, Pointner R (2005) Laparoscopic nissen fundoplication with prosthetic hiatal closure reduces postoperative intrathoracic wrap herniation: preliminary results of a prospective randomized functional and clinical study. Arch Surg 140(1):40–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Oelschlager BK, Pellegrini CA, Hunter J et al (2006) Biologic prosthesis reduces recurrence after laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. Ann Surg 244(4):481–490

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Oelschlager BK, Pellegrini CA, Hunter JG et al (2011) Biologic prosthesis to prevent recurrence after laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: long-term follow-up from a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. J Am Coll Surg 213(4):461–468

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tatum RP, Shalhub S, Oelschlager BK, Pellegrini CA (2008) Complications of PTFE mesh at the diaphragmatic hiatus. J Gastrointest Surg 12(5):953–957

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Stadlhuber RJ, Sherif AE, Mittal SK et al (2009) Mesh complications after prosthetic reinforcement of hiatal closure: a 28-case series. Surg Endosc 23(6):1219–1226

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hazebroek EJ, Leibman S, Smith GS (2009) Erosion of a composite PTFE/ePTFE mesh after hiatal hernia repair. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 19(2):175–177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Frantzides CT, Carlson MA, Loizides S et al (2010) Hiatal hernia repair with mesh: a survey of SAGES members. Surg Endosc 24(5):1017–1024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Memon MA, Memon B, Yunus RM, Khan S (2016) Suture cruroplasty versus prosthetic hiatal herniorrhaphy for large hiatal hernia: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg 263(2):258–266

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Tam V, Winger DG, Nason KS (2016) A systematic review and meta-analysis of mesh vs suture cruroplasty in laparoscopic large hiatal hernia repair. Am J Surg 211(1):226–238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Koetje JH, Irvine T, Thompson SK et al (2015) Quality of life following repair of large hiatal hernia is improved but not influenced by use of mesh: results from a randomized controlled trial. World J Surg 39(6):1465–1473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kohn GP, Price RR, Demeester SR et al (2013) Guidelines for the management of hiatal hernia—a SAGES guideline. http://www.sages.org/publications/guidelines/guidelines-for-the-management-of-hiatal-hernia. Updated 2013. Accessed 15 Jun 2016

  24. Watson A, Jenkinson LR, Ball CS, Barlow AP, Norris TL (1991) A more physiological alternative to total fundoplication for the surgical correction of resistant gastro-oesophageal reflux. Br J Surg 78(9):1088–1094

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gatenby PA, Bright T, Watson DI (2012) Anterior 180 degrees partial fundoplication—how I do it. J Gastrointest Surg 16(12):2297–2303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Toupet A (1963) Technic of esophago-gastroplasty with phrenogastropexy used in radical treatment of hiatal hernias as a supplement to heller’s operation in cardiospasms. Mem Acad Chir (Paris) 89:384–389

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Jamieson GG, Watson DI, Britten-Jones R, Mitchell PC, Anvari M (1994) Laparoscopic nissen fundoplication. Ann Surg 220(2):137–145

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Velanovich V, Vallance SR, Gusz JR, Tapia FV, Harkabus MA (1996) Quality of life scale for gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Am Coll Surg 183(3):217–224

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Mouli VP, Ahuja V (2011) Questionnaire based gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) assessment scales. Indian J Gastroenterol 30(3):108–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Rentz AM, Battista C, Trudeau E et al (2001) Symptom and health-related quality-of-life measures for use in selected gastrointestinal disease studies: a review and synthesis of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics 19(4):349–363

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Koetje JH, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Irvine T, Mayne GC, Watson DI (2016) Measuring outcomes of laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery: quality of life versus symptom scores? World J Surg. 40(6):1404–1411

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Blazeby JM, Alderson D, Winstone K et al (1996) Development of an EORTC questionnaire module to be used in quality of life assessment for patients with oesophageal cancer. The EORTC quality of life study group. Eur J Cancer 32A(11):1912–1917

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Viklund P, Lindblad M, Lagergren J (2005) Influence of surgery-related factors on quality of life after esophageal or cardia cancer resection. World J Surg 29(7):841–848

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Grant S, Aitchison T, Henderson E et al (1999) A comparison of the reproducibility and the sensitivity to change of visual analogue scales, borg scales, and likert scales in normal subjects during submaximal exercise. Chest 116(5):1208–1217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Oor JE, Koetje JH, Roks DJ, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Hazebroek EJ (2016) Laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair in the elderly patient. World J Surg. 40(5):1137–1144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Koch OO, Pointner R, Granderath FA (2012) Lower recurrence rates after mesh-reinforced versus simple hiatal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 22(6):498–502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Furnee E, Hazebroek E (2013) Mesh in laparoscopic large hiatal hernia repair: a systematic review of the literature. Surg Endosc 27(11):3998–4008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kamolz T, Granderath F, Pointner R (2003) Laparoscopic antireflux surgery: disease-related quality of life assessment before and after surgery in GERD patients with and without barrett’s esophagus. Surg Endosc 17(6):880–885

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Isala Zwolle, Dr. Van Heesweg 2, 8025 AB, Zwolle, The Netherlands

    Jan H. Koetje, Henderik L. Van Westreenen & Vincent B. Nieuwenhuijs

  2. Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan 1, 3430 VB, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands

    Jelmer E. Oor, David J. Roks & Eric J. Hazebroek

Authors
  1. Jan H. Koetje
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jelmer E. Oor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David J. Roks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Henderik L. Van Westreenen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Eric J. Hazebroek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Vincent B. Nieuwenhuijs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan H. Koetje.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Drs. Jan H. Koetje, Jelmer E. Oor, David J. Roks, Henderik L. Van Westreenen, Eric J. Hazebroek and Vincent B. Nieuwenhuijs have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Koetje, J.H., Oor, J.E., Roks, D.J. et al. Equal patient satisfaction, quality of life and objective recurrence rate after laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair with and without mesh. Surg Endosc 31, 3673–3680 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5405-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5405-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation