Literature DB >> 24101448

Reoperative intervention in patients with mesh at the hiatus is associated with high incidence of esophageal resection--a single-center experience.

Kalyana Nandipati1, Maria Bye, Se Ryung Yamamoto, Pradeep Pallati, Tommy Lee, Sumeet K Mittal.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mesh hiatoplasty is a widely debated topic among foregut surgeons. While short-term outcomes tout decreased recurrence rates, an increase in mesh-related complications has been reported. The aim of this study is to present a single-center experience with reoperative intervention in patients with previous mesh at the hiatus.
METHODS: After institutional review board approval, a prospectively maintained database was retrospectively queried to identify patients who underwent reoperative intervention between 2003 and spring of 2013 and had mesh placed at a previous hiatal hernia procedure. Patient charts were reviewed and data variables collected.
RESULTS: Twenty-six patients (mean age of 56.7 ± 18.3; 19 females) who underwent 27 procedures met the inclusion criteria. Synthetic mesh was placed in 15 (56 %) procedures, while the remaining 12 had biologic mesh. The mean interval between reoperative intervention and previous surgery was 33 months. Dysphagia (56 %) was the most common presentation, while three patients had mesh erosion. Recurrent hiatus hernia (2 to 7 cm) was noted in 19 (70 %) patients. Eight patients (30 %) underwent redo fundoplication, six patients (22 %) were converted to Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy, two patients (7.4 %) underwent distal esophagectomy with esophagojejunostomy, five patients (19 %) had subtotal esophagectomy with gastric pull-up, and one patient underwent substernal gastric pull-up for esophageal bypass with interval esophagectomy. The mean operative time was 252 ± 71.7 min, and the median blood loss was 150 ml (range, 50-1,650 ml). There was no postoperative mortality.
CONCLUSION: Reoperative intervention in patients with mesh at the hiatus is associated with a high need for esophageal resection. More than two thirds of the patients also had a recurrent hiatal hernia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24101448     DOI: 10.1007/s11605-013-2361-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg        ISSN: 1091-255X            Impact factor:   3.452


  26 in total

1.  Hiatal mesh is associated with major resection at revisional operation.

Authors:  Michael Parker; Steven P Bowers; Jillian M Bray; Adam S Harris; Erol V Belli; Jason M Pfluke; Susanne Preissler; Horacio J Asbun; C Daniel Smith
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-05-13       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Outcomes after repair of the intrathoracic stomach: objective follow-up of up to 5 years.

Authors:  S K Mittal; J Bikhchandani; O Gurney; F Yano; T Lee
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-07-10       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Laparoscopic prosthetic hiatal reinforcement for large hiatal hernia repair.

Authors:  N Chilintseva; C Brigand; C Meyer; S Rohr
Journal:  J Visc Surg       Date:  2012-02-23       Impact factor: 2.043

4.  Laparoscopic mesh cruroplasty for large paraesophageal hernias.

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

5.  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

6.  Mesh crural repair of large paraesophageal hiatal hernias.

Authors:  T T Hui; D S Thoman; M Spyrou; E H Phillips; T David
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 0.688

7.  Hiatal hernia repair with biologic mesh reinforcement reduces recurrence rate in small hiatal hernias.

Authors:  E Schmidt; A Shaligram; J F Reynoso; V Kothari; D Oleynikov
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2013-02-26       Impact factor: 3.429

8.  Laparoscopic refundoplication with prosthetic hiatal closure for recurrent hiatal hernia after primary failed antireflux surgery.

Authors:  Frank A Granderath; Thomas Kamolz; Ursula M Schweiger; Rudolph Pointner
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2003-08

9.  Laparoscopic reintervention for failed antireflux surgery: subjective and objective outcomes in 176 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Yashodhan S Khajanchee; Robert O'Rourke; Maria A Cassera; Prakash Gatta; Paul D Hansen; Lee L Swanström
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2007-08

Review 10.  Mesh complications after prosthetic reinforcement of hiatal closure: a 28-case series.

Authors:  Rudolf J Stadlhuber; Amr El Sherif; Sumeet K Mittal; Robert J Fitzgibbons; L Michael Brunt; John G Hunter; Tom R Demeester; Lee L Swanstrom; C Daniel Smith; Charles J Filipi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-12-06       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopic augmentation of the diaphragmatic hiatus with biologic mesh versus suture repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Stavros A Antoniou; Beat P Müller-Stich; George A Antoniou; Gernot Köhler; Ruzica-Rosalia Luketina; Oliver O Koch; Rudolph Pointner; Frank-Alexander Granderath
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2015-06-07       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 2.  Treatment of giant paraesophageal hernia: pro laparoscopic approach.

Authors:  B Dallemagne; G Quero; A Lapergola; L Guerriero; C Fiorillo; S Perretta
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2017-11-25       Impact factor: 4.739

3.  Primary versus redo paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair: a comparative analysis of operative and quality of life outcomes.

Authors:  H Reza Zahiri; Adam S Weltz; Udai S Sibia; Neethi Paranji; Steven D Leydorf; George T Fantry; Adrian E Park
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-05-10       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Primary and Redo Antireflux Surgery: Outcomes and Lessons Learned.

Authors:  Saurabh Singhal; Daniel R Kirkpatrick; Takahiro Masuda; Janese Gerhardt; Sumeet K Mittal
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 5.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of mesh vs suture cruroplasty in laparoscopic large hiatal hernia repair.

Authors:  Vernissia Tam; Daniel G Winger; Katie S Nason
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 2.565

6.  Laparoscopic rectopexy for complete rectal prolapse: mesh, no mesh or a ventral mesh?

Authors:  Deepraj S Bhandarkar
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 1.407

7.  Functional Results after Repair of Large Hiatal Hernia by Use of a Biologic Mesh.

Authors:  Filimon Antonakis; Ferdinand Köckerling; Friedrich Kallinowski
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2016-03-09
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.