Impact of pre-existing mesh at the hiatus at revisional hiatal hernia surgery.

IF 2.6 3区 医学
Ahmed W H Barazanchi, Juanita Noeline Chui, Nazim Bhimani, Steven Leibman, Garett Smith
{"title":"Impact of pre-existing mesh at the hiatus at revisional hiatal hernia surgery.","authors":"Ahmed W H Barazanchi, Juanita Noeline Chui, Nazim Bhimani, Steven Leibman, Garett Smith","doi":"10.1093/dote/doae050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recurrence after laparoscopic hiatus hernia repair (LHR) is high, with few symptomatic patients undergoing redo LHR. Morbidity is higher in redo surgery compared with the primary operation. Tens of studies have explored the safety of redoing LHR. However, the impact of existing mesh on operative risk is rarely examined. We aim to assess the impact of mesh at the hiatus on the safety of redo LHR. This was a cohort study examining redo LHR patients from a prospectively maintained database from January 2002 to December 2023. The primary outcome was intra-/postoperative complications. Follow-up was extracted from clinical records. Predictors of complications were assessed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. Redo LHR was performed in 100 patients; 22 had previous mesh. One encountered mortality with 23 complications. Five patients had absorbable mesh, with the remainder nonabsorbable. Overall complications were significantly higher with mesh at nine (40.9%) compared to no mesh redo at 14 (17.9%), P = 0.023. There was no difference in rates of visceral injury with mesh at four (18.2%) and no mesh at six (7.7%), P = 0.22. The median follow-up was 7 months; there was no difference in reflux rates (P = 0.70) but higher rates of dysphagia (P = 0.010). Higher overall complications were noted in patients with previous hiatal mesh repair at the time of LHR. However, major visceral complications were similar regardless of mesh use. Mesh at the hiatus should not be a deterrent for reoperative hiatus surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":54277,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Esophagus","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diseases of the Esophagus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doae050","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recurrence after laparoscopic hiatus hernia repair (LHR) is high, with few symptomatic patients undergoing redo LHR. Morbidity is higher in redo surgery compared with the primary operation. Tens of studies have explored the safety of redoing LHR. However, the impact of existing mesh on operative risk is rarely examined. We aim to assess the impact of mesh at the hiatus on the safety of redo LHR. This was a cohort study examining redo LHR patients from a prospectively maintained database from January 2002 to December 2023. The primary outcome was intra-/postoperative complications. Follow-up was extracted from clinical records. Predictors of complications were assessed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. Redo LHR was performed in 100 patients; 22 had previous mesh. One encountered mortality with 23 complications. Five patients had absorbable mesh, with the remainder nonabsorbable. Overall complications were significantly higher with mesh at nine (40.9%) compared to no mesh redo at 14 (17.9%), P = 0.023. There was no difference in rates of visceral injury with mesh at four (18.2%) and no mesh at six (7.7%), P = 0.22. The median follow-up was 7 months; there was no difference in reflux rates (P = 0.70) but higher rates of dysphagia (P = 0.010). Higher overall complications were noted in patients with previous hiatal mesh repair at the time of LHR. However, major visceral complications were similar regardless of mesh use. Mesh at the hiatus should not be a deterrent for reoperative hiatus surgery.

食管裂孔疝翻修手术中食管裂孔处原有网片的影响。
腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术(LHR)后复发率很高,很少有症状患者接受LHR重做手术。与初次手术相比,再次手术的发病率更高。数十项研究探讨了重做 LHR 的安全性。然而,现有网片对手术风险的影响却鲜有研究。我们旨在评估裂孔处的网片对重做 LHR 安全性的影响。这是一项队列研究,研究对象是 2002 年 1 月至 2023 年 12 月前瞻性数据库中的重做 LHR 患者。主要结果为术中/术后并发症。随访资料来自临床记录。采用单变量和多变量逻辑回归分析评估并发症的预测因素。100名患者接受了重做LHR手术,其中22人曾使用过网片。其中一名患者因 23 例并发症死亡。五名患者使用了可吸收网片,其余为不可吸收网片。使用网片的总并发症率为 9 例(40.9%),明显高于不使用网片的 14 例(17.9%),P = 0.023。使用网片的内脏损伤率为 4 例(18.2%),而不使用网片的内脏损伤率为 6 例(7.7%),两者没有差异,P = 0.22。中位随访时间为 7 个月;反流率无差异(P = 0.70),但吞咽困难率较高(P = 0.010)。进行 LHR 时曾进行过食道裂孔网修复术的患者总并发症较高。不过,无论使用何种网片,主要的内脏并发症都相似。食道裂孔处的网片不应成为再次进行食道裂孔手术的阻碍因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Diseases of the Esophagus
Diseases of the Esophagus Medicine-Gastroenterology
自引率
7.70%
发文量
568
期刊介绍: Diseases of the Esophagus covers all aspects of the esophagus - etiology, investigation and diagnosis, and both medical and surgical treatment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信