Literature DB >> 15156380

Mid term analysis of safety and quality of life after the laparoscopic repair of paraesophageal hiatal hernia.

E M Targarona1, J Novell, S Vela, G Cerdán, G Bendahan, S Torrubia, C Kobus, P Rebasa, C Balague, J Garriga, M Trias.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Initial experience with the laparoscopic repair of paraesophageal and type III mixed hiatal hernias showed that it is safe and feasible, with excellent immediate and short-term results. However, after a longer follow-up, a recurrence rate of < or =40% has been demonstrated. Data related to the outcome of paraesophageal hernia repair and the recurrence rate are still lacking. Quality-of-life scores may offer a better means of assessing the impact of surgical treatment on the overall health status of patients. Therefore, we performed prospective evaluation of anatomic and/or symptomatic recurrences after paraesophageal or large hiatal hernia repair. In addition, we investigated the correlation between recurrence and the patient's quality of life.
METHODS: All patients after who had undergone repair of paraesophageal of mixed hiatal hernia were identified prospectively from a database consisting of all patients who had had laparoscopic operations for gastroesophageal pathology at our hospital between February 1998 and December 2002. The preoperative symptoms were taken from patients' clinical files. In March 2003, all patients with > or =6 months of follow-up had a barium swallow and were examined for radiological and clinical signs of recurrence. Thereafter, the patients' quality of life after surgery was evaluated using three standard questionnaires (Short Form 36 [SF-36], Glasgow Dyspepsia Severity Score [GDSS], and Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index [GIQLI]. RESULT: During the study period, 46 patients had been operated on. The mean age was 63 years (range, 28-93). Thirty seven of them had a follow-up of > or =6 months. Eight patients (21%) had postoperative gastrointestinal symptoms. Barium swallow was performed in 30 patients (81%) and showed a recurrence in six of them (20%). According to SF-36 and GDSS, the patients' postoperative quality of life reached normal values and did not differ significantly from the standard values for the Spanish population of similar age and with similar comorbidities. Successfully operated patients reached a GIQLI value comparable to the standard population. However, symptomatic patients had significantly lower GIQLI scores than the asymptomatic or the Rx-recurrent group.
CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic treatment of large paraesophageal and mixed hiatal hernias is not only feasible and safe but also offers a good quality of life on a midterm basis. However, the anatomic and functional recurrence rate is high. The next step is to identify the subset of patients who are at risk of failure and to establish technical alternatives that would ensure the durability of the repair.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15156380     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-003-9227-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  41 in total

1.  Clinical and radiologic assessment of laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair.

Authors:  J S Wu; D L Dunnegan; N J Soper
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Laparoscopic vs open surgery: a preliminary comparison of quality-of-life outcomes.

Authors:  V Velanovich
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  [Population reference values of the Spanish version of the Health Questionnaire SF-36].

Authors:  J Alonso; E Regidor; G Barrio; L Prieto; C Rodríguez; L de la Fuente
Journal:  Med Clin (Barc)       Date:  1998-10-10       Impact factor: 1.725

4.  Laparoscopic management of giant paraesophageal herniation.

Authors:  R J Wiechmann; M K Ferguson; K S Naunheim; P McKesey; S J Hazelrigg; T S Santucci; R S Macherey; R J Landreneau
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 4.330

5.  Laparoscopic management of giant type III hiatal hernia and short esophagus. Objective follow-up at three years.

Authors:  Blair A Jobe; Ralph W Aye; Clifford W Deveney; John S Domreis; Lucius D Hill
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2002 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.452

6.  Laparoscopic mesh cruroplasty for large paraesophageal hernias.

Authors:  J K Champion; D Rock
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-02-17       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  A prospective, randomized trial of laparoscopic polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) patch repair vs simple cruroplasty for large hiatal hernia.

Authors:  Constantine T Frantzides; Atul K Madan; Mark A Carlson; George P Stavropoulos
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2002-06

8.  Laparoscopic repair of large paraesophageal hiatal hernia.

Authors:  P S Dahlberg; C Deschamps; D L Miller; M S Allen; F C Nichols; P C Pairolero
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 9.  Durability of laparoscopic repair of paraesophageal hernia.

Authors:  M B Edye; J Canin-Endres; F Gattorno; B A Salky
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Laparoscopic management of large paraesophageal hiatal hernia.

Authors:  P C Leeder; G Smith; T C B Dehn
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-06-25       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  28 in total

1.  Laparoscopic repair of large hiatal hernia: impact on dyspnoea.

Authors:  Jacqui C Zhu; Guillermo Becerril; Katy Marasovic; Alvin J Ing; Gregory L Falk
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-06-03       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Combining laparoscopic giant paraesophageal hernia repair with sleeve gastrectomy in obese patients.

Authors:  Ankit D Patel; Edward Lin; Nathaniel W Lytle; Juan P Toro; Jahnavi Srinivasan; Arvinpal Singh; John F Sweeney; S Scott Davis
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-08-27       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Controversies in paraesophageal hernia repair: a review of literature.

Authors:  W A Draaisma; H G Gooszen; E Tournoij; I A M J Broeders
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-08-04       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair: long-term outcome with the focus on the influence of mesh reinforcement.

Authors:  B P Müller-Stich; F Holzinger; T Kapp; C Klaiber
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-01-21       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Paraesophageal Hernia Repair Outcomes Using Minimally Invasive Approaches.

Authors:  Patrick J McLaren; Kyle D Hart; John G Hunter; James P Dolan
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 14.766

6.  Severe complication of laparoscopic mesh hiatoplasty for paraesophageal hernia.

Authors:  Nico Zügel; Reinhold A Lang; Martin Kox; Thomas P Hüttl
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-05-14       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Predictive factors for morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: age, ASA score and operation type influence morbidity.

Authors:  Hannes J Larusson; Urs Zingg; Dieter Hahnloser; Karen Delport; Burkhardt Seifert; Daniel Oertli
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  A clinical prediction rule for perioperative mortality and major morbidity after laparoscopic giant paraesophageal hernia repair.

Authors:  Nikiforos Ballian; James D Luketich; Ryan M Levy; Omar Awais; Dan Winger; Benny Weksler; Rodney J Landreneau; Katie S Nason
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2013-01-11       Impact factor: 5.209

9.  Evaluation of lightweight titanium-coated polypropylene mesh (TiMesh) for laparoscopic repair of large hiatal hernias.

Authors:  Eric J Hazebroek; Ada Ng; David H K Yong; Hayley Berry; Steven Leibman; Garett S Smith
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-07-15       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  [Report of 12 years experience in the surgical treatment of 286 paraesophageal hernias].

Authors:  B Geißler; E Birk; M Anthuber
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 0.955

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.