Systematic review of the perioperative classification, diagnosis, description and repair of hiatus hernias in randomized controlled trials.

Abstract

Hiatus hernias (HH) are a common cause of symptoms and complications, with considerable variation in anatomy, function, diagnosis and treatment. We undertook the first systematic review to appraise how HH are diagnosed and classified in the literature, using randomized controlled trials as a sample. A search was performed in July 2021of the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and 2832 articles were identified and 64 were included. Median Jadad score was 2. Studies demonstrated considerable variation in diagnosis, classification and minimum surgical steps. The commonest classifications before surgery were axial length and the Type I-IV classification, variably assessed by endoscopy and contrast swallow. Intra-operatively, the commonest classification was type I-IV. A minority used more than one classification, or alternatives such as defect size and Hill classification. Most studies reported minimum steps, but these varied. Only a minority reported criteria for diagnosing recurrence. Using randomized controlled trials to appraise the highest quality evidence in the literature, we found considerable variation and inconsistency in the way HH are diagnosed and classified. This lack of a 'common language' has significant impacts for the generalizability of evidence, study synthesis and design. We propose the development of an internationally accepted classification. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. We confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved by all named authors and that there are no other persons who satisfied the criteria for authorship but are not listed. We further confirm that the order of authors listed in the manuscript has been approved by all of us.