Giant Hiatal Hernia Research Articles

280. MANOMETRIC FINDINGS IN PATIENTS WITH GIANT HIATAL HERNIA: OESOPHAGEAL PHYSIOLOGY APPEARS TO IMPROVE WITH SURGERY

Abstract Background High resolution manometry (HRM) is a gold standard test of oesophageal physiology. The use of HRM in patients with giant hiatus hernia (GHH) is limited by historical technical challenges as well as unclear clinical implications of the findings. The aim of this study is to demonstrate feasibility of HRM in patients with GHH and study effect of surgery on oesophageal physiology of patients undergoing GHH repair. Methods Data was extracted from a prospectively populated database of patients with giant (>30% stomach above diaphragm) hiatus hernias. All patients that underwent HRM before and after surgery were included. Manometric findings before and after surgery were analysed and compared. Patient symptoms were correlated with manometric findings. Results Inclusion criteria were met by 30 patients: 83% female, average age 74 (range 51-86), 93% had type III hernia containing on average 55% of stomach. All operations but one were performed laparoscopically. Pre-operatively average LOS length was 1.89cm which improved significantly to 2.19cm after surgery (p<0.05). Nine patients had ineffective oesophageal motility on index study which normalised post operatively in 4 patients. Lower oesophageal sphincter integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) increased post-operatively from 9.07mmHg to 11.52mmHg (p<0.05). Distal contractility improved post-operatively, however this was not significant. Most common presenting symptoms were dyspnoea, anaemia, retrosternal pain, and dysphagia. There was no association between dysphagia and manometric findings before or after surgery. Conclusion This study provides an insight into HRM findings in patients with GHH before and after surgery. Majority of the physiological parameters improved with surgery. There was no correlation of symptom of dysphagia with manometric findings.

353. INNOVATIVE SURGICAL TECHNIQUES TO REDUCE RECURRENCE IN LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL TREATMENT OF GIANT HIATAL HERNIA

Abstract Background In Japan, there is an increasing trend in the number of esophageal hiatal hernia (EHH) surgeries performed in elderly patients. EHH in the elderly patients are associated with surgical invasiveness and complications, but safe surgery can contribute to improving quality of life (QOL). We report on the safe surgical technique and treatment results for giant hiatal hernia. Methods The most important point to be careful of when suturing the esophageal hiatus is damage to the diaphragm leg. If the esophageal hiatus is large, reducing the pneumoperitoneum pressure as much as possible will reduce the tissue resistance during suturing, allowing suture closure without placing excessive tension on the diaphragm legs. If the esophageal hiatus is large, the pneumoperitoneum pressure should be kept as low as possible to reduce tissue resistance during suturing and prevent damage to the diaphragm legs. Surgery is usually performed with a high pneumo-abdominal pressure of 10 mmHg, but if suture closure of the esophageal hiatus is difficult, suturing is performed with a low pneumo-abdominal pressure of 6 mmHg. We underwent 103 cases of EHH surgery between 2012 and 2022. There were 73 cases (70.8%) of over 75 years old patients, and 71 cases (68.9%) of giant mixed type EHH. We compared the surgical outcomes in the early group up to 2018, in which surgery was performed with high pneumo-abdominal pressure during hiatal closure, and the latter group, from 2019 onwards, in which surgery was performed with low pneumo-abdominal pressure during hiatal closure. Results 67 cases in the early group: 23 cases with sliding type/44 cases with mixed type (65.6%), 36 cases in the latter group: 8 cases with sliding type/27 cases with mixed type (75.0%), the proportion of mixed type was higher in the late group. Mesh was used in 1 case in the early group and 0 cases in the latter group. The recurrence rate was 7 cases (10.4%) in the early group and 1 case (2.8%) in the late group, and although the proportion of mixed type cases was higher in the latter group, the recurrence rate was lower. Reoperation for recurrence was performed in 1 patient in the early group. In one case of recurrent surgery in the early group, the type of recurrence was that the muscle bundle of the diaphragm leg on one side was torn, the hiatus was dilated, and the transverse colon was invaginated into the mediastinum. From this experience, I reaffirmed the importance of reliably suturing the esophageal hiatus without damaging tissue in order to reduce recurrence of giant hiatal hernia surgery. Although there are differences in observation periods, in recent years, appropriate management of intraoperative pneumoperitoneum pressure has been able to reduce recurrence and complications, and it has also been possible to safely improve QOL in elderly patients. Conclusions In giant hiatal hernia surgery, appropriate control of intraoperative pneumoperitoneum pressure can reduce recurrence.

324. A RETROSPECTIVE SINGLE CENTRE PROPENSITY-MATCHED ANALYSIS OF TRANSTHORACIC VERSUS TRANSABDOMINAL PROCEDURES FOR GIANT HIATAL HERNIAS

Abstract Background Transthoracic open procedure (TTO) was historically the preferred approach for treatment of giant hiatal hernias. However, the last decades transabdominal laparoscopic procedures (TAL) became the standard approach in many centres. The aim of the study was to compare short-term and midterm outcomes, as well as patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs, between TTO and TAL for giant hiatal hernias. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on all primary surgeries performed for giant hiatal hernias between 2008 and 2022. Patients who underwent TAL were propensity-matched (n= 36) to those who underwent TTO based on: age, gender, Charlson Comorbidity Score and hernia type. The two groups were compared in terms of surgery duration, length of stay (LOS), Clavien-Dindo score, intrahospital reoperation, hernia recurrence and need for reinterventions. PROMswere compared between total of TTO (n= 187) and TAL (n= 48): for symptom score, QoL-score, overall satisfaction and wound pain. Median clinical follow-up was 365.5 days. Median PROMsfollow-up was 55.3 months. Results Surgery duration (224 vs 177min, P<0.001) and LOS (11 vs 4days, P<0.001) were longer in TTO. Clavien-Dindo scores were alike (P= 0.260). Intrahospital reoperation was not statistically different (8.3% vs 0%, P= 0.239). Midterm recurrence rates suggested a non-significant trend towards lower recurrence in TTO (2.8% vs 16.7%, P= 0.107). Reintervention rates were alike (16.7% vs 11.1%, P= 0.735). QoL-score was inferior for TTO (0.705 vs 0.355, P= 0.036). Wound pain scores were higher in TTO (1 vs 0, P <0.001). Symptom score and satisfaction scores were alike, respectively 0.685 vs 0.760, P= 0.688 and 9 vs 9, P= 0.421. Conclusions TAL for giant hiatal hernias showed superior results compared to TTO for duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, QoL-score and wound pain scores. However, midterm results showed a noticeable trend towards higher recurrence rates for TAL. TAL should be considered when proceeding with surgery for giant hiatal hernias but a possible higher risk of recurrence must be taken into account. Further long-term clinical follow-up and comparison to PROMscould guide future decision-making.

495. LAPAROSCOPIC FUNDOPLICATION IMPROVES ESOPHAGEAL MOTILITY IN PATIENTS WITH GERD A HIGH VOLUME SINGLE CENTER CONTROLLED STUDY IN HIGH-RESOLUTION MANOMETRY ERA

Abstract Background Pathophysiology of GERD is complex and esophageal motility disorders are frequently contributing to the disease. Most of the existing literature demonstrates that Laparoscopic Fundoplication (LF) is safe in the setting of ineffective or weak peristalsis, however the effect of the wrap on esophageal motility is still debated. This study aimed to assess how a functioning and effective fundoplication could impact the esophageal motility in patients with GERD. Methods We analyzed prospectively collected data on patients who underwent laparoscopic Nissen (LN) or Toupet (LT) fundoplication for GERD between 2010-2022. We selected patients who have been treated with LF according to the GERD international guidelines. The exclusion criteria were: patients with a giant hiatal hernia and patients with a proof of a too-tight LF. Patients were evaluated with the GerdQ questionnaire, barium-swallow, endoscopy and HRM and 24-hour pH-Impedance before and after surgery. The HRM were reviewed by 2 experts (Chicago Classification v4.0). LF failure was recorded in case of an abnormal postoperative pH-MII using the Lyon 2.0 criteria. Results We recruited 124 patients (M:F=89:35). Fifty-eight LN and 66 LT were recorded. A good outcome at the 24-hour pH-Impedance was registered in 103 patients (GLF) and a failure in 21 patients (FLF). As shown in Figure 1, in GLF patients, 29 had a preoperative motility disorder (24 IEM and 5 DES), and postoperatively 22 (76%) of these patients had a normalization of the esophageal motility. Ten FLF patients had a preoperative motility disorder (9 IEM and one DES); 4 (40%) of them showed normal motility after LF. There was a significant association between GLF and normalization of esophageal motility (p<0.05). Conclusion This study demonstrates that LF is an effective and functioning treatment in patients with GERD associated with an esophageal motility disorder. Moreover, our results indicate that LF could determine a normalization of the disordered esophageal motor function in patients with GERD.

Resection of fibrotic tissue leads to esophageal lengthening during robot-assisted giant hiatal hernia repair.

Resection of fibrotic tissue leads to esophageal lengthening during robot-assisted giant hiatal hernia repair.

PHASIX™ ST MESH FOR CRURAL REINFORCEMENT DURING GIANT HIATAL HERNIA REPAIR: PRESENTATION OF SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

Abstract Aim Crural mesh reinforcement during large hiatal hernia repair has been advocated to defend against early recurrences. However, the optimal mesh material and configuration remain in question. This study presents the rationale and surgical technique for crural repair augmentation using Phasix™ ST Mesh. Methods We present a case of a giant hiatal hernia and outline the rationale and surgical technique for using Phasix™ ST Mesh in the repair. Results A 72-year-old man presented with a giant type IV hiatal hernia. A massive mediastinal protrusion of intra-abdominal fat and viscera, and an associated crucial cardiorespiratory compromise were noted. A preoperative CT scan revealed a widened hiatus measuring 9.2 × 7.6 cm. The patient underwent laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair and Nissen fundoplication. During the procedure, following visceral reduction and hernia sac dissection and excision, a widened round hiatus and significantly thinned crura were found. To reinforce the primary crural suturing, two strips of Phasix™ ST Mesh, each measuring 1.5 × 4 cm, were used, and a U-shaped mesh was placed onlay to augment the repair. The procedure lasted 214 minutes, and the patient was discharged on the 3rd postoperative day without complications. Conclusions The application of Phasix™ ST Mesh in the repair of giant hiatal hernias offers the dual benefits of reconstructing the original anatomy and reinforcing the hiatus, while avoiding the implantation of permanent foreign material around the esophagus.

Should We Operate Nonagenarians with Symptomatic Giant Paraesophageal Hernias?

Introduction: Hiatal hernia (HH) is a common disorder of the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract that general surgeons encounter. Giant paraesophageal is a subtype of HH in which more than 30% of the stomach is located in the chest. It can cause symptoms such as dysphagia, UGI bleeding, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and vomiting. As the life expectancy of the general population increases, the incidence of giant HH increases and can cause morbidity, including recurrent admissions and prolonged length of hospitalization. In this article, we describe a cohort of nonagenarian patients with HH who were admitted to our institution and were treated either surgically or medically. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed our prospectively maintained database of all nonagenarians who were admitted to our center between 2018 and 2022 with the diagnosis of HH. We compared the demographic data, clinical data, and outcomes between patients undergoing operative and nonoperative management. Results: Twenty patients of age over 90 years were hospitalized with HH-related symptoms. Six underwent surgery, whereas 14 received medical management. Surgical patients had fewer overall hospitalization days, shorter length of stay, and less blood product requirements. Notably two cases of in-hospital mortality occurred in the nonoperative group, whereas none occurred in the operative group. All surgical procedures were performed laparoscopically, with two minor perioperative complications. Conclusion: In selected nonagenarian patients, laparoscopic HH repair is safe and should be considered favorably. It can reduce hospitalization time and can mitigate morbidity.

Innovative esophageal lengthening surgical technique in giant hiatal hernia repair

Innovative esophageal lengthening surgical technique in giant hiatal hernia repair

A new approach to the treatment of large and giant hiatal hernia

Objective. To retrospectively analyse the results of a new technique of laparoscopic surgery for large and giant hiatal hernias of the esophageal orifice of the diaphragm, which consists in the use of diaphragmatic incisions and mesh implants to reduce the incidence of recurrence and complications.
 Materials and methods. During the period from 2010 to 2023, laparoscopic interventions were performed in 62 patients, 43 (69.4%) women and 19 (30.6%) men, with large and giant hiatal hernias of the esophageal orifice of the diaphragm. The average age of the patients was 62.8 years. The diagnostic criteria used to select patients were the size of the hiatal opening and clinical symptoms. Fibroesophagogastroduodenoscopy, abdominal computed tomography, and contrast radiography were used to assess the size of the hernia and plan surgical intervention. During the operation, we performed loosening incisions of the diaphragm to reduce the tension during suturing of hiatus defects. Progrip self–locking meshes were also used to close the diaphragmatic defects, which allowed them to be securely fixed without tension and reduce the risk of recurrence.
 Results. Most patients had comorbidities that required a special approach during surgery. The average duration of the operations was 132 minutes, which indicates their technical complexity. The postoperative course in most patients was uncomplicated with a minimal recovery period. The average hospital stay was 5.2 days. Recurrence of hernia was detected in 2 (3.2%) of 62 patients, which indicates the effectiveness of the new technique.
 Conclusions. The use of a new concept of laparoscopic surgery for large and giant hernias of the esophageal orifice of the diaphragm, which involves the performance of laxative incisions of the diaphragm and the use of self–locking mesh, significantly reduces the incidence of recurrence and complications, which ensures high treatment efficiency and improves the quality of life of patients. The results of the study confirm the importance of an individual approach to the treatment of hiatal hernias and the possibility of optimising laparoscopic techniques to improve their effectiveness.

Could "Low Quality of Life" Rather Than "Significant Symptoms" Be Better Criteria for the Selection of Patients for the Repair of a Giant Hiatus Hernia?

Purpose Giant hiatus hernia (GHH) repair is undertaken electively in symptomatic patients, to prevent complications such as gastric volvulus and subsequent mortality. Advances in laparoscopy and perioperative care have reduced the risk of GHHrepair, and improvement in quality of life (QoL) has become an important outcome measure. In our unit, we have been assessing QoL in all the operated as well as non-operated patients with GHH, using the "Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia" (QOLRAD) questionnaire. We sought to evaluate differences in QoLbetween patients who were managed conservatively for GHHand those who underwent GHH repair over a two-year period. Methods All patients seen in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tertiary Unit in Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trustwith GHH between January 2015 and December 2022 were identified from a prospectively kept database. QOLRAD scores were analyzed and compared between conservatively and operatively managed patients using the Mann-Whitney U test. Demographic and operative outcome data were also collected. Results Eighty-seven patients with GHH were included. QoL of 51 patients improved significantly after elective surgery. Five out of 36 patients, who were initially treated conservatively, elected to have repair during their follow-up period. These 5 Patients had a lower initial QOLRAD score in comparison to those whose management remained conservative (2.72 vs 5.05, Mann Whitney U testp=0.034), and their QOLRAD scores also improved significantly after the operation. QOLRAD scores in conservatively managed patients remained stable over a two-year follow-up period. Conclusion Objectively calculated low QoL may be a more useful tool than subjective symptoms in selecting patients for elective repair of GHH.

Laparoscopic proximal sleeve gastrectomy as an alternative for management of giant hiatal hernias

Background and aim: Large anatomic defects of the diaphragmatic hiatus known as giant hiatal hernias could be associated with reflux esophagitis disease (GERD) and other life-threatening complications such as gastric volvulus, ischemia and perforation, thus surgical repair is warranted. Although usually the key steps to surgical repair are reduction of the herniated stomach, complete excision of the sac, hiatus repair, and an antireflux procedure, surgery in these cases is associated with a great rate of anatomic and functional failure, therefore different techniques have been described since the original description of Collis gastroplasty designed to lengthen the short esophagus. Methods: We report here the technique and results performing proximal vertical gastrectomy or proximal sleeve gastrectomy (PSG) as an alternative in cases in which the possibility of recurrence of the hiatal hernia (HH) is high. Results: After years of follow-up after surgery, all the case patients presented here are free of gastroesophageal reflux or dysphagia symptoms, with no necessity for acid suppression medication, and no side effects of the surgery. Conclusion: The treatment of giant HH is a complex and challenging disorder to treat. PSG seems to be a good surgical alternative for the treatment of some special cases of giant HH minimizing the GERD symptoms and possible recurrences.

Determining the need for a thoracoscopic approach to treat a giant hiatal hernia when abdominal access is poor.

Giant hernias present a significant challenge for digestive surgeons. The approach taken (laparoscopic vs thoracoscopic) depends largely on the preferences and skills of each surgeon, although in most cases today the laparoscopic approach is preferred. To determine whether patients presenting inadequate laparoscopic access to the intrathoracic hernial sac obtain poorer postoperative results than those with no such problem, in order to assess the need for a thoracoscopic approach. For the retrospective series of patients treated in our hospital for hiatal hernia (n = 112), we calculated the laparoscopic field of view and the working area accessible to surgical instruments, by means of preoperative imaging tests, to assess the likely outcome for cases inaccessible to laparoscopy. Patients with giant hiatal hernias for whom a preoperative calculation suggested that the laparoscopic route would not access all areas of the intrathoracic sac presented higher rates of perioperative complications and recurrence during follow-up than those for whom laparoscopy was unimpeded. The difference was statistically significant. Moreover, the insertion of mesh did not improve results for the non-accessible group. For patients with giant hiatal hernias, it is essential to conduct a preoperative evaluation of the angle of vision and the working area for surgery. When parts of the intrathoracic sac are inaccessible laparoscopically, the thoracoscopic approach should be considered.

OGBN P31 Laparoscopic versus open repair of giant paraoesophageal herniae: a 4-year retrospective study

Abstract Background Although laparoscopic repair of giant paraoesophageal hernia (PEH) has known advantages over open repair including a reduced post-operative length of stay (LOS) and reduced post-operative pain, there has been concern amongst surgeons regarding the recurrence rate. We sought to further analyse differences in outcomes in a retrospective series of patients with giant hiatus hernia in a single tertiary centre. Methods All giant PEH receiving operative repair at a tertiary referral centre (UCLH) were reviewed retrospectively over a one-year period from July 2019-July 2022. Diagnosis was made on gastroscopy and computer tomography (CT). A giant PEH was defined as one in which the hernia contained at least 50% of the stomach. If the patient was symptomatic post-operatively they were investigated for recurrence with gastroscopy and CT. Results The laparoscopic cohort (n=14, median age of 72 years, ASA 2) had similar demographics to those receiving open repair (n=21, median age of 68 years, ASA 2.5). Median length of stay was shorter in the laparoscopic cohort compared to the open cohort (3.5 days (1-7) versus 7 days (5-9)). The laparoscopic and open cohorts had similar rates of minor complications (42.8% (6=2, Clavien Dindo 2) versus 47.6% (n=10, Clavien Dindo 2))respectively. Recurrence of reflux or dysphagia symptoms was higher in those who had a laparoscopic repair (28.6% versus 14.3%). One radiologically confirmed recurrence occurred in the open group (4.7%). Conclusions Although the benefits of a faster post-operative recovery with a shorter LOS were clear in the cohort following laparoscopic repair, a higher rate of recurrence of symptoms was evident within those receiving a laparoscopic repair. Large, controlled, prospective studies with long-term follow-up are required in order to further establish differences in outcomes between laparoscopic and open repair of giant PEH.

Dysphagia and oesophageal dilation in giant hiatus hernia: angulation of the gastro-oesophageal junction or achalasia?

The co-existence of achalasia and large para oesophageal hernia (PEH) is uncommon. The anatomical disruption of the GOJ mechanism by hiatal herniation may result in chronic angulation and secondary partial oesophageal obstruction. A unique case is described where the diagnostic uncertainty of coexistant achalasia and PEH with angulation causing chronic oesophageal obstruction existed. This case highlights the importance of multimodality workup of oesophageal disorders utilising endoscopy, fluoroscopy and manometry. Accurate identification of physiological abnormalities allowed appropriate design of operative intervention.

Trends in outcomes of 862 giant hiatus hernia repairs over 30 years

PurposeLaparoscopic giant hiatus hernia repair is technically difficult with ongoing debate regarding the most effective surgical technique. Repair of small hernia has been well described but data for giant hernia is variable. This study evaluated trends in outcomes of laparoscopic non-mesh repair of giant paraesophageal hernia (PEH) over 30 years.MethodsRetrospective analysis of a single-surgeon prospective database. Laparoscopic non-mesh repairs for giant PEH between 1991 and 2021 included. Three-hundred-sixty-degree fundoplication was performed routinely, evolving into “composite repair” (esophagopexy and cardiopexy to the right crus). Cases were chronologically divided into tertiles based on operation date (Group 1, 1991–2002; Group 2, 2003–2012; Group 3, 2012–2021) with trends in casemix, operative factors and outcomes evaluated. Hernia recurrence was plotted using weighted moving average and cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis.Results862 giant PEH repairs met selection criteria. There was an increasing proportion of “composite repair” after the first decade (Group 1, 2.7%; Group 2, 81.9%; Group 3, 100%; p < 0.001). There were less anatomical hernia recurrence (Group 1, 36.6%; Group 2, 22.9%; Group 3, 22.7%; p < 0.001) and symptomatic recurrence (Group 1, 34.2%; Group 2, 21.9%; Group 3, 7%; p < 0.001) over time. The incidence of anatomical recurrence declined over time, decreasing from 30.8% and plateauing below 17.6% near the study’s end. Median followup (months) in the first decade was higher but followup between the latter two decades comparable (Group 1, 49 [IQR 20, 81]; Group 2, 30 [IQR 15, 65]; Group 3, 24 [14, 56]; p < 0.001). There were 10 (1.2%) Clavien–Dindo grade ≥ III complications including two perioperative deaths (0.2%).ConclusionHernia recurrence rates decreased with increasing case volume. This coincided with the increasing adoption of “composite repair”, supporting the possible improvement in recurrence rates with this approach.

181 Lessons Learned from Complex Abdominal Wall Reconstruction for the Management of Giant Paraoesophageal Hernia - a Case Analysis

Abstract Aim In this case report, we present a new method in the management of a giant hiatus hernia: the use of crural relaxing incisions. This new method in combination with previously known strategies including botox and preoperative optimisation for surgery with weight loss and prehabiliation can result in a more effective surgical hiatus hernia repair and subsequently lead to a reduced risk of hiatus hernia recurrence. Case Presentation 71yo man admitted to hospital with a one-week history of generalised abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting and chest pain. He had a background of a known large hiatus hernia for the last 10 years. An abdominal CT showed a large type IV hiatus hernia containing the stomach, transverse colon, pancreatic body, and pancreatic neck. CT guided botulinum toxin A injections were given by interventional radiology during which the muscle bellies of the transversus abdominus, internal and external obliques were targeted. The patient was placed on a meal replacement (Optifast) diet. A laparoscopic thoraco-abdominal hiatus repair was performed finding a giant hiatus hernia containing the entire stomach, first part of the duodenum, left lobe of liver, transverse colon, small bowel and distal pancreas. Due to the size of the hiatus hernia and the potential tension likely to result from a repair, both right and left crural relaxing incisions were made to facilitate closure. Crural closure was reinforced with a Bio A mesh secured in a C configuration covering the right crural relaxing incision. The patient recovered well postoperatively. Follow up imaging did now show recurrence.

ThTP2.11 Three-year follow up outcomes in mesh-augmented vs sutured cruroplasty in giant hiatal hernia repair

Abstract Aims There is no consensus for indications on mesh-augmentation of crural repair in hiatus hernia. We evaluated outcomes following mesh-augmented versus suture repair of giant hiatus hernia. Methods Giant hiatus hernia was defined as a hernia containing at least 30% of the stomach in the thorax. We undertook a retrospective analysis of records for patients undergoing surgical repair of hiatus hernia in a tertiary centre between 2016 and 2019, with a minimum follow up of three years. Patients were identified using clinical coding. Pre-operative investigations (OGD, barium swallow, CT) and operative findings were used to identify those patients with giant hiatus hernias. Outcomes assessed included morbidity, recurrence and revisional surgery. Results 58 patients of median age 72 (27-90) underwent repair of a giant hiatus hernia. 56 (97%) were performed laparoscopically (1 conversion, 1 open). All were primary procedures, 50 elective and 8 emergency. 20 had mesh-augmented suture repair (19 BIO-A, 1 Permacol) and 38 had primary suture repair alone. 26 (44.8%) had additional fundoplication. By three years post-surgery 14/58 (24%) recurrent hiatus hernias were identified on further investigation, similar in both groups (5/20 vs 9/38). Symptomatic revisional surgery was undertaken in 2/20 (10%) mesh-augmented and 2/38 (5%) suture only repairs. 30-day mortality was 0%. Morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3+) was recorded in 5 patients (8.6%). Conclusion Giant hiatal hernia repair complication and recurrence rates were comparable to published studies. Those patients with recurrence following mesh-augmented repair were more likely to require revision surgery. However mesh may be used in cruroplasty for perceived weaker or wider crura.

The Belsey Mark IV procedure in the era of minimally invasive antireflux surgery.

Different surgical techniques exist in the treatment of giant and complex hiatal hernia. The aim of this study was to identify the role of the Belsey Mark IV (BMIV) antireflux procedure in the era of minimally invasive techniques. A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted. All patients who underwent an elective BMIV procedure aged 18years or older, during a 15-year period (January 1, 2002 until December 31, 2016), were included. Demographics, pre-, per- and postoperative data were analyzed. Three groups were compared. Group A: BMIV as first procedure-group B: BMIV as a second procedure (first redo intervention)-group C: patients who had two or more previous antireflux interventions. A total of 216 patients were included for analysis (group A n = 127; group B n = 51; group C n = 38). Median follow-up in groups A, B and C was 28, 48 and 56months, respectively. Patients in group A were older and had a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score compared to groups B and C. There was zero mortality in all groups. The severe complication rate of 7.9% in group A was higher compared with the 2.9% in group B and 3.9% in group C. Long-term outcome showed true recurrence, defined as both radiographic recurrence as well as associated symptoms, in 9.5% of cases in group A, 24.5% in group B and 44.7% in group C. The BMIV procedure is a safe procedure with good results, moreover in the aging and comorbid patient with primary repair of a giant hiatal hernia.

Giant hiatal hernia: A review of the clinical presentation, surgical technique, and operative video

Introduction: Giant hiatal hernia represents 0.3–15% of all hiatal hernia. Its complication such as the strangulation of the stomach are life-threatening. Therefore, in most of the cases it must be surgically handled. Case Report: We report the case of a 74-year-old patient with giant hiatal hernia. He presented with sub-acute symptoms (e.g., vomiting, appetite loss, and hematemesis). Considering the symptomatology and complementary tests, we decided to perform a laparoscopic hernia repair using mesh reinforcement. We provided a commented operative video to describe the surgical procedure. We then discussed the surgical technique and decided how to conduct a safe and efficient repair. Conclusion: A surgical approach is the recommended treatment in most giant hiatal hernia due to its life-threatening complications. The technique should be tailored to the patient. Although there is no consensus whether to use a mesh reinforcement, we believed that a cautious mesh placement should be considered when the crura are of poor quality. Surgeons should also be cautious with the fundoplicature and the risk of stricture, therefore we propose the systematic use of a tube to test the passage in the esophago-gastric junction.

A Narrative Review on Treatment of Giant Hiatal Hernia.

Background: The current gold standard of treatment for giant hiatal hernias (GHHs) is laparoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic surgery was performed as a less invasive procedure for paraesophageal hernias more than 25 years ago. Its viability and safety have almost all been shown. Materials and Methods: A review of recent and current studies' literature was done. Prospective randomized trials, systematic reviews, clinical reviews, and original articles were all investigated. The data were gathered in the form of a narrative evaluation. We examine the state of laparoscopic GHH repair today and outline the GHH management strategy. Results: In this review, we clear up misunderstandings of GHH and address bad habits that may have contributed to poor results, and we have consequently performed a methodical evaluation of GHH. First, we address subcategorizing GHH and provide criteria to define them. The preoperative workup strategies are then discussed, with a focus on any pertinent and frequent atypical symptoms, indications for surgery, timing of surgery, and the importance of surgery. The approach to the techniques and the logic behind surgery are then presented along with some important dissection techniques. Finally, we debate the role of mesh reinforcement and evaluate the data in terms of recurrence, reoperation rate, complications, and delayed stomach emptying. Finally, we suggest a justification for common postoperative investigations. Conclusions: Surgery is the only effective treatment for GHH at the moment. If the right operational therapy principles are applied, this is generally successful. There is a growing interest in laparoscopic paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair as a result of the introduction of laparoscopic antireflux surgery. Today's less invasive procedures provide a better therapeutic choice with a lower risk.