Laparoscopic large hiatus hernia repair with mesh reinforcement versus suture cruroplasty alone: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

To compare the difference in outcomes in laparoscopic large hiatus hernia (LHH) repair using suture-based and mesh-based repair techniques. A systematic search of articles was conducted in PubMed, Medline and Embase using the PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing recurrences and reoperations in those patients with large hiatal hernia repair (> 30% stomach in the chest, > 5cm hiatal defect, hiatal surface area > 10 cm2) who had mesh vs no mesh were assessed quantitatively. The impact of mesh on significant intraoperative/postoperative surgical complications was qualitatively assessed. Pooled data included six randomized controlled trials and thirteen observational studies with 1670 patients (824 with no mesh, 846 with mesh). There was a significant reduction in the total recurrence rate with mesh (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.25-0.80, p = 0.007). Mesh use did not cause significant reduction in recurrences > 2cm (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.52-1.67, p = 0.83) or in reoperation rates (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39-1.07, p = 0.09). None of the specific meshes assessed were found to be superior in the reduction of recurrence or reoperation rates. Cases of mesh erosion with eventual foregut resection were noted and were associated with synthetic meshes only. Mesh reinforcement seemed protective against total recurrence in LHH although this has to be interpreted with caution given the level of heterogeneity introduced by the inclusion of observational studies in the analysis. There was no significant reduction in large recurrences (> 2cm) or reoperation rate. If the synthetic mesh is to be used patients need to be informed of the risk of mesh erosion.