Objective:
To determine whether absorbable or nonabsorbable mesh repair of large hiatus hernias is followed by less recurrences at late follow-up compared to sutured repair.
Summary of Background Data:
Radiological recurrences have been reported in up to 30% of patients after repair of large hiatus hernias, and mesh repair has been proposed as a solution. Earlier trials have revealed mixed outcomes and early outcomes from a trial reported previously revealed no short-term advantages for mesh repair.
Methods:
Multicentre prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial of 3 methods of hiatus hernia repair; sutures versus absorbable mesh versus nonabsorbable mesh. Primary outcome – hernia recurrence assessed by barium meal X-ray and endoscopy at 3–4 years. Secondary outcomes – clinical symptom scores at 2, 3, and 5 years.
Results:
126 patients were enrolled – 43 sutures, 41 absorbable mesh, and 42 nonabsorbable mesh. Clinical outcomes were obtained at 5 years in 89.9%, and objective follow-up was obtained in 72.3%. A recurrent hernia (any size) was identified in 39.3% after suture repair, 56.7% – absorbable mesh, and 42.9% – nonabsorbable mesh (P = 0.371). Clinical outcomes were similar at 5 years, except chest pain, diarrhea, and bloat symptoms which were more common after repair with absorbable mesh.
Conclusions:
No advantages were demonstrated for mesh repair at up to 5 years follow-up, and symptom outcomes were worse after repair with absorbable mesh. The longer-term results from this trial do not support mesh repair for large hiatus hernias.
Laparoscopic Nissen and partial fundoplications proved to be durable and achieved good long-term outcomes. At earlier follow-up, dysphagia was less common but reflux more common after anterior partial fundoplication, although differences had largely disappeared by 10 years.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.