Introduction: Surgical treatment of type I hiatal sliding hernias aims to control the gastroesophageal reflux symptoms and prevention of hernia recurrence. Usually, a cruroplasty is performed to narrow the hiatal orifice. Here, it remains controversial if a mesh reinforcement of the cruroplasty should be performed, since benefits as well as mesh-associated complications have been described.
Methods: We performed a propensity-score matching analysis with data derived from the Herniamed registry comparing patients undergoing laparoscopic type I hiatal hernia repair with and without synthetic mesh. We analyzed perioperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data including data derived from the 1-year follow-up in the registry.
Results: 6.533 patients with an axial, type I hiatal hernia and gastroesophageal reflux are included in this analysis. Mesh augmentation of the hiatoplasty was performed in n = 1.252/6.533 (19.2%) of patients. The defect size in the subgroup of patients with mesh augmentation was with mean 16.3 cm2 [14.5; 18.2] significantly larger as in the subgroups without mesh augmentation with 10.8 cm2 [8.7; 12.9]; (p < 0.001). In patients with mesh hiatoplasty n = 479 (38.3%) Nissen and n = 773 (61.7%) Toupet fundoplications are performed. 1.207 matched pairs could be analyzed. The mean defect size after matching was with 15.9 cm2 comparable in both groups. A significant association was seen regarding recurrence (4.72% mesh vs. 7.29% non-mesh hiatoplasty, p = 0.012). The same relation can be seen for pain on exertion (8.78% vs 12.10%; p = 0.014) and pain requiring treatment (6.13% vs 9.11%; p = 0.010). All other outcome parameter showed no significant correlation.
Conclusions: Our data demonstrate that mesh-reinforced laparoscopic type I hiatal hernia repair in larger defects is associated with significantly lower rates for recurrence, pain on exertion and pain requiring treatment.
Keywords: GERD; Hernia repair; Herniamed; Hiatal hernia; Mesh; Reflux.
© 2024. The Author(s).