腹腔镜在食管裂孔疝修补术中的临床应用

目的探讨腹腔镜在食道裂孔疝修补术中应用的疗效及安全性。方法运用腹腔镜对21例食道裂孔疝患者行食道裂孔疝修补术,其中13例食道裂孔缺损≥4 cm者使用巴德Cru-raSoft补片进行修补,8例缺损4 cm者用2-0普理灵缝线连续缝合将两膈肌脚关闭。同时将胃底固定于食道左侧膈肌下,以恢复锐性His角。结果 21例均顺利完成疝修补术,无中转开腹,未出现并发症。平均手术时间117 min;平均出血量约36.7 ml;平均住院日3.7 d。术后3个月行胃镜复查,显示患者的食道炎均已明显好转,未见消化性溃疡或糜烂性胃炎;术后随访3～30个月,单纯缝合修补者有2例复发。结论对于老年人要适当控制气腹的压力。腹腔镜手术的高清晰度、宽广视野是直视手术所无法比拟的,用以治疗食道裂孔疝有手术损伤小、出血少、患者恢复快、住院时间短等优点,其并发症的发生率和死亡率都比开腹直视手术要低。腹腔镜下行食道裂孔疝修补的治疗是安全可行的,值得临床推广应用。     

腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术并发症的预防

目的探讨使用腹腔镜行食管裂孔疝修补术的疗效和安全性。减少手术并发症,随访腹腔镜治疗食道裂孔疝的效果。方法对280例食管裂孔疝患者使用腹腔镜行食管裂孔疝修补术,其中132例做胃底270°部分折叠术（Toupet术）,148例做胃底360°折叠术（Nissen术）。36例应用补片修补疝缺口,剩余患者采用直接缝合。结果 280例腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术全部获得成功。手术时间30～190min,平均手术时间110min,失血10～50ml;术后24～48h进流质饮食,无术后并发症;术后平均住院5.7d。结论腹腔镜食道裂孔疝修补术具有疗效确定、安全和创伤小的优点。并发症率极低。     

腹腔镜手术治疗食管裂孔疝的42体会

目的探讨使用腹腔镜行食管裂孔疝修补术的疗效和安全性。方法对42例食管裂孔疝患者行腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术,其中32例行胃底360°折叠术(Nissen术),10例行胃底270°部分折叠术(Toupet术)。39例采用4号丝线缝合修补疝缺口,3例应用补片修补疝缺口。结果42例腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术全部成功。手术时间平均(138±22)min,失血平均(62±16)ml;无术后并发症;术后平均住院(5.2±1.9)d。术后症状完全消失32例(76%),好转10例(24%)。结论腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术具有疗效确定、安全和创伤小的优点,值得进一步推广应用。     

��ǻ��ʳ���ѿ����޲���

目的　探讨腹腔镜食道裂孔疝修补术的可行性及安全性。方法　回顾性分析 2 0 0 1年 3月至 2 0 0 3年12月天津南开医院行腹腔镜食道裂孔疝修补术 11例病人的临床资料。结果　 10例行裂孔疝修补后同时行胃底折叠术 ,其中 7例行Nissen胃底折叠术 ,3例行Toupet胃底折叠术 ,1例仅行裂孔修补术。术后症状完全缓解。食道下段压力由 (8 6± 2 4 )mmHg(1mmHg =0 133kPa)提高到 (18 2 0± 3 4 3)mmHg(P <0 0 1) ,2 4hpH值监测评分由 5 3 4± 39 7降低到 8 0 4± 2 12 (P <0 0 1) ,较手术前有明显改善 ,并达到正常范围。无手术并发症 ,无中转开腹及死亡病例。结论　对于食道裂孔疝 ,腹腔镜食道裂孔疝修补术是一种安全、有效的治疗方法     

腹腔镜下食管裂孔疝修补术

目的 探讨腹腔镜下应用补片行食管裂孔疝无张力修补术的临床效果. 方法 2006年8月至2009年10月我们对46例食管裂孔疝患者在腹腔镜下进行食管裂孔疝应用补片无张力修补,并同期给予部分胃底折叠术.结果 45例患者成功地在腹腔镜下进行了无张力修补,1例患者因术中出现食道损伤,中转开胸治疗.手术时间70～210min,平均90min. 术中出血10～110ml,平均25ml,均无输血.所有患者术后症状完全缓解.术后住院3～30d,平均住院日为5d.对45例患者术后进行3～25个月随访,平均12个月,未发现食管裂孔疝复发病例及有关补片并发症的发生.结论 腹腔镜下食管裂孔疝无张力修补术是一种安全有效的微创方法,具有创伤少、恢复快、术后复发率低等特点.     

腹腔镜治疗食管裂孔疝的临床应用

目的探讨使用腹腔镜行食管裂孔疝修补术的疗效和安全性。方法对26例食管裂孔疝患者使用腹腔镜行食管裂孔疝修补术，其中16例做胃底270。部分折叠术（Toupet术），10例做胃底360°胃底折叠术（Nissen术）。19例应用补片修补疵缺口，7例采用7号丝线缝合。结果26例腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术全部获得成功。手术时间30～190min，平均110min，失血10～50ml；术后24～48h进流质饮食，无术后并发症；术后平均住院5．7d。结论26例患者的反酸症状均在24h内缓解，术后停用抗酸药物，修补术具有疗效确定、安全和创伤小的优点。值得进一步推广应用。     

防粘连复合补片在腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术中的应用

目的 :探讨防粘连复合补片在腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术中的应用。方法 :2009年9月至2013年11月,对本院120例食管裂孔疝病人应用防粘连复合补片行腹腔镜裂孔疝修补术。结果:手术均成功,平均手术时间(72±22)(42~130)min。平均术中出血量(12±14)(0~50)m L,无输血。术后平均住院时间为(3.5±1.6)(2~7)d。术后随访6~48个月,33%的病人呼吸道症状完全消失,59%的病人不同程度缓解。满意度达93%。解剖学复发6例,其中症状复发2例,无补片并发症发生。结论:严格掌握手术适应证,防粘连复合补片在腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术中的应用安全有效。     

腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术的初步探讨

目的探讨腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补和胃底折叠术（Toupet手术）治疗食管裂孔疝的临床效果。方法 2009年1月～2010年5月,21例患者行腹腔镜食管裂孔疝（Ⅰ型9例,Ⅱ型4例,Ⅲ型6例,Ⅳ型2例）修补,采用单纯缝合膈肌脚,补片完全缝合,补片缝合加钉合等方法修补食管裂孔疝,并同期行部分胃底折叠术。结果本组患者手术均获成功,手术时间85～170min。无中转开腹及死亡病例。术后平均住院7d。术后随访1～16个月,20例临床症状完全消失,1例改善不明显,无明确复发病例。结论腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补和胃底折叠术安全有效,应根据患者情况采用个体化的修补方式。     

腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术的临床分析

目的：总结腹腔镜下应用补片行食管裂孔疝修补和部分胃底折叠术治疗食管裂孔疝的初步经验。方法：2007年5月至2009年12月为13例食管裂孔疝患者行腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术或（和）胃底折叠术。观察术后相关并发症。结果：13例手术均获成功,无中转开放手术。手术时间130-205min,平均152min,术中基本无出血。术后第2天开始饮水,第3天开始进流质饮食。术后住院4-6d。1例直接缝合者术日晚发生气胸,经胸腔穿刺抽气消失。1例胃底折叠术患者在开始进普通饮食时有轻微吞咽困难,术后1个月临床症状消失。术后随访6-12个月,平均8.5个月,行钡餐造影或CT检查均未见复发。结论：腹腔镜下应用补片和（或）胃底折叠术治疗食管裂孔疝安全有效,值得临床推广。     

不同材质补片固定大鼠膈肌后的炎症反应、粘连及补片皱缩情况对比研究

背景与目的：食管裂孔疝是外科常见病症，临床上多采用补片以无张力修补的方式进行治疗。食管裂孔疝的补片修补中补片的选择及其应用效果方面的实验数据仍相对缺乏。因此，本研究通过在大鼠食道裂孔处膈肌组织上分别固定聚丙烯补片和复合补片，比较两种材质补片对周围组织的影响，以及自身皱缩情况，为临床食管裂孔疝补片的选择提供参考。方法：雄性SD大鼠在分离胃部与肝脏相连接组织显露胃食道裂孔后，分别用单丝缝线将轻量聚丙烯补片（聚丙烯补片组）或复合补片（复合补片组）固定于食道裂孔处膈肌组织，或不进行补片固定（假手术组）。分别在术后7、15、30 d时记录每组每只大鼠的体质量和饮食量。观察30 d后处死大鼠，分析补片皱缩程度、粘连强度以及膈肌组织的病理学变化。结果：各组大鼠手术前后的体质量及每天进食量均无明显的变化（均P>0.05）。复合补片组膈肌组织与补片的粘连范围及粘连程度分值均明显低于聚丙烯补片组（均P<0.05）；两组补片均出现皱缩，但复合补片组术后补片面积明显大于聚丙烯补片组，皱缩率明显低于聚丙烯补片组（均P<0.05）；与假手术组比较，聚丙烯补片组和复合补片组膈肌组织出现局部肌纤维萎...     

腹腔镜下巨大食管裂孔疝修补术25例

目的 探讨腹腔镜巨大食管裂孔疝修补术的临床特点和可行性.方法 2008年1月至2010年8月,应用腹腔镜治疗25例巨大食管裂孔疝,术中均使用专用补片修补食管裂孔,16例同时行胃底折叠术,记录围手术期相关指标,并随访观察治疗效果和术后复发情况.结果 25例均完成腹腔镜手术,手术85～210 min,平均106 min;术中出血量55～150 ml,平均94 ml.术后住院4～21天,平均6.8天.术后症状均得到缓解,无严重并发症,随访3～35个月,平均13.6个月,病人满意率为88%,4例出现轻度反酸症状,1例裂孔疝复发.结论 腹腔镜巨大食管裂孔疝修补术安全、可行,具有创伤小、恢复快、疗效可靠的特点,术中应用Bard CruraSoft补片可缩短手术时间,降低修补食管裂孔的难度,减少复发.

Abstract：

Objective To investigate the clinical characteristics and feasibility of laparoscopic repair of giant hiatal hernia. Methods From January 2008 to August 2010, 25 consecutive patients with giant hiatal hernia underwent laparoscopic repair. Crural closure was performed by means of two or three interrupted nonabsorbable sutures plus a tailored PTFE/ePTFE composite mesh. It was patched across the defect and secured to each crura with staples. Laparoscopic fundoplication was performed concomitantly in 16 cases according to the specific conditions of patients. Para-operative clinical parameters were recorded. All patients were routinely followed up. Clinical outcomes were collected and analyzed. Results All laparoscopic surgeries were accomplished successfully. The operating time was 85 -210 minutes (mean, 106 minutes) ,the operative blood loss was 55 - 150 ml( mean, 94 ml) ,the postoperative hospital stay was 4 -21 days( mean, 6.8 days). The symptoms in most cases were adequately relieved after operation. There was no severe postoperative morbidity. After the follow-up period of 3 - 35months ( mean, 13.6 months), the satisfaction rate of surgery was 88%. 4 cases had mild symptom recurrence of acid reflux.Hiatal hernia recurrence occurred in 1 case. Conclusions Laparoscopic repair of giant hiatal hernia is a safe and effective minimally invasive procedure, with the advantages of minimized trauma, quick recovery and reliable effect. The use of a tailored PTFE/ePTFE composite mesh ( Bard CruraSoft Mesh)for giant hiatal hernia proved to be effective in reducing the operation time and technique demands, and the rate of postoperative hernia recurrence, with a very low incidence of mesh-related complications.     

Prosthetic closure of the esophageal hiatus in large hiatal hernia repair and laparoscopic antireflux surgery

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy has become the standard surgical approach to both surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease and large/paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair with excellent long-term results and high patient satisfaction. However, several studies have shown that laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair is associated with high recurrence rates. Therefore, some authors recommend the use of prosthetic meshes for either laparoscopic large hiatal hernia repair or laparoscopic antireflux surgery. The aim of this article was to review available studies regarding the evolution, different techniques, results, and future perspectives concerning the use of prosthetic materials for closure of the esophageal hiatus. METHODS: A search of electronic databases, including Medline and Embase, was performed to identify available articles regarding prosthetic hiatal closure for large hiatal or paraesophageal hernia repair and/or laparoscopic antireflux surgery. Techniques and results as well as recurrence rates and complications related to the use of prosthetics for hiatal closure were reviewed and compared. Additionally, recent experiences and recommendations of experienced experts in this field were collected. RESULTS: The results of 42 studies were analyzed in this review. Some techniques of mesh hiatal closure were evaluated; however, most authors prefer posterior mesh cruroplasty. The type and shape of hiatal meshes vary from small angular meshes to A-shaped, V-shaped, or complete circular meshes. The most frequently utilized materials are polypropylene, polytetrafluoroethylene, or dual meshes. All studies show a low rate of postoperative hernia recurrence, with no mortality and low morbidity. In particular, comparative studies including two prospective randomized trials comparing simple sutured hiatal closure to prosthetic hiatal closure show a significantly lower rate of postoperative hiatal hernia recurrence and/or intrathoracic wrap migration in patients who underwent prosthetic hiatal closure. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic large hiatal/paraesophageal hernia repair with prosthetic meshes as well as laparoscopic antireflux surgery with prosthetic hiatal closure are safe and effective procedures to prevent hiatal hernia recurrence and/or postoperative intrathoracic wrap migration, with low complication rates. The type of mesh, particularly the size and shape, is still controversial and is a matter for future research in this field.     

��ǻ���޴�ʳ���ѿ����޲���75���ٴ�����

??Laparoscopic repair for giant hiatal hernia??A clinical analysis of 75 patients SUN Xiang-yu, QIN Ming-fang, ZHAO Hong-zhi, et al. Department of Mini-invasive Surgery, Tianjin Nankai Hospital, Tianjin 300100, China
Corresponding author: SUN Xiang-yu, E-mail: xiangyusun79@126.com
Abstract Objective To investigate the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic repair for giant hiatal hernia. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients with giant hiatal hernia performed laparoscopic repair between January 2006 and August 2012 in Tianjin Nankai Hospital were analyzed retrospectively. The operation time, hospitalization time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, postoperative improvement of symptoms and upper gastrointestinal imaging were studied. Results All the patients were treated by laparoscopy successfully. Fifty-one patients were reinforced with meshes. Twenty-four patients were reinforced without mesh. Hiatal pillars in 40 patients were partly contracted and closed with meshes. Hiatal pillars in 35 patients were directly closed up to normal diameter by interrupted stitches. Among them, 11 patients were placed with meshes. Laparoscopic repair complicated with fundoplication was performed in 64 patients with average operation time of (97.2±2.1)min, average operative blood loss of (82.0±1.7)mL and average hospital stay of (5.0±1.2)d. No conversion and death occurred. Seventeen patients (22.7%) had short-term or long-term complications. Seventy-five patients were followed up for 3 months to 62 months with average of (31.0±2.1)months. Main symptoms of 66 patients (88%) were disappeared. Nine patients ??12%??had recurrence of symptoms. Four patients??5.3%??were found recurrence by barium swallow. Conclusion Laparoscopic repair for giant hiatal hernia is safe and reliable. Mesh repair can reduce the recurrence rate but accompanied with risk of complication.     

Laparoscopic Revisional Fundoplication with Circular Hiatal Mesh Prosthesis: The Long-term Results

BACKGROUND: Failure of hiatal closure has proven to be the most frequent complication leading to revisional surgery after primary failed open or laparoscopic antireflux surgery. To prevent hiatal hernia recurrence some authors recommend the use of prosthetic meshes for reinforcement of the hiatal crura. The aim of the present prospective study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a circular hiatal onlay mesh prosthesis applied during laparoscopic refundoplication after primary failed antireflux surgery with intrathoracic wrap migration. The follow-up period was 5 years. METHODS: A total of 33 patients underwent laparoscopic refundoplication for recurrent symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease after primary failed laparoscopic or open antireflux surgery. The underlying morphological complication for symptom recurrence in all patients was hiatal hernia recurrence with intrathoracic migration of the fundoplication. During revisional surgery, after breakdown of the former fundoplication, the esophageal hiatus was thoroughly revised and a circular polypropylene mesh was used to buttress the primarily simple sutured hiatal crura. Additionally, in all patients a refundoplication was performed. Recurrences, complications, functional data, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, and cinematographic X-ray results, as well as quality of life data, were evaluated for the 60-month follow-up period. RESULTS: All reoperations were successfully completed laparoscopically. Twenty-one patients underwent laparoscopic 360 degrees "floppy" Nissen refundoplication, and 12 patients underwent laparoscopic 270 degrees Toupet refundoplication. Hiatal closure was performed by placing a circular polypropylene sheet that had a 3-4 cm keyhole for the esophageal body. Of 24 patients who underwent redo-surgery before May 2000, no patient developed a recurrent hiatal hernia during the first 12 postoperative months. All 33 patients were re-evaluated and underwent complete diagnostic work-up over a follow-up period of 60 months postoperatively. During the long-term follow-up, a new recurrent hiatal hernia with intrathoracic wrap migration developed in 2 patients (6%). In both cases, slippage occurred anteriorly to the esophagus. Both patients were scheduled for repeat refundoplication. In all other patients no recurrence occurred for the complete follow-up period, and no mesh-related complications developed. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic refundoplication for primary failed hiatal closure with the use of a circular mesh prosthesis is a safe and effective procedure to prevent hiatal hernia recurrence for short- and mid-term follow-up. However, for long-term follow-up, even with the placement of prosthetic mesh, re-recurrence occurs in some patients, leading to repeated surgery.     

腔镜手术治疗儿童食管裂孔疝的临床体会(附104例报告)

目的:探讨腹腔镜下儿童食管裂孔疝的治疗经验与体会。方法:回顾分析2002年6月至2016年12月为104例食管裂孔疝患儿行腹腔镜手术的临床资料。患儿50 d~10岁,平均(4.0±1.5)岁。按美国消化内镜学会分类:滑动性疝25例、混合性疝42例、食管旁疝37例,术前均通过上消化道造影明确食管裂孔疝。采用5孔法施术,行Nissen-Rossetti、改良Thal法修补食管裂孔并进行胃底折叠。结果:腹腔镜手术均顺利完成,无一例中转开腹。疝孔直径3~5 cm,手术时间90~150 min,平均(110±20)min;术后5例复发。其中4例再次通过腹腔镜进行修补。改良Thal法术后发生胃食管反流4例,术后1例发生裂孔关闭过紧,再次腔镜下松解裂孔。本组术后24~48 h正常进食,平均(28±4)h;术后5~7 d出院。随访3个月~13年,患儿均生长发育良好。结论:腹腔镜下治疗儿童食管裂孔疝具有良好的手术效果,术者必须具备较高的腔镜技术,术前患儿的评估对手术方法的选择与预后具有重要作用。     

Laparoscopıc Fundoplicatıon with Prosthetic Hiatal Closure

Background Despite the good results reported after laparoscopic fundoplication, failure is still a major problem. Hiatal disruption is one of the common patterns of anatomical failure. The aim of this study was to compare the results of suture repair of diaphragmatic crura with routine polypropylene mesh reinforcement in addition to suture repair. Methods A total of 551 patients who underwent laparoscopic fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease between March 1998 and July 2004 were included into the study. Crural closure had been performed with simple primary suture repair alone between March 1998 and July 2002 (n = 335, group I), and mesh reinforcement of the hiatal repair was performed routinely thereafter (n = 176, group II). These groups were evaluated prospectively. Results We observed a significantly lower rate of recurrence in group II than in group I. After a 2-year follow-up, the rate of anatomic morphologic recurrence was 6.0% in group I and 1.8% in group II. Considering the recurrence rate, there was significant statistical difference. The overall recurrence rate in our series was 4.6%. There was no correlation between the size of the hernia and recurrence. No significant difference was found between groups regarding the rate of postoperative dysphagia. We have not observed any complications related to the use of polypropylene mesh in group II. Conclusion The results of this study suggest that polypropylene mesh reinforcement increases the success rate for laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair without causing an additional complication burden. We propose routine use of mesh reinforcement in laparascopic antireflux surgery. An erratum to this article can be found at     

单孔腹腔镜全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术的效果探讨

目的:探讨单孔腹腔镜全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术(totally extraperitoneal,TEP)的安全性及可行性,并总结其手术要点。方法:回顾分析2015年9月至2016年12月我院为25例腹股沟疝患者行单孔腹腔镜TEP的临床资料。结果:25例手术均获成功,无一例中转开放手术。手术时间67~123 min,平均(90.04±15.30)min;术后住院2~4 d,平均(3.16±0.75)d。2例患者术后发生阴囊血清肿,术后均无慢性疼痛、切口感染及补片排斥反应等其他术后并发症发生,切口愈合佳。术后随访3~24个月,无复发病例。结论:单孔腹腔镜TEP治疗腹股沟疝是安全、可行的,术后瘢痕小,美容效果好,可在熟练掌握常规腹腔镜TEP的基础上应用于对美观要求较高的患者。     

The use of crural relaxing incisions with biologic mesh reinforcement during laparoscopic repair of complex hiatal hernias

Introduction

Laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair has a better chance of success if the hiatus is closed without tension. This study attempts to answer the following questions: (1) What is the rate of hiatal hernia recurrence in patients who undergo hiatal closure with diaphragmatic relaxing incisions? (2) Can biologic mesh be safely substituted for synthetic mesh as coverage of the relaxing incisions?

Methods

We identified all patients who underwent laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair at our institution between 2007 and 2013 and reviewed their clinical records. Radiologic recurrence was identified by an experienced radiologist and defined as the presence of any abdominal contents located above the diaphragm on esophagram. Clinical recurrence was defined as little or no improvement in symptoms, the development of a new symptom, or the need for medical, endoscopic, or surgical treatment of postoperative symptoms.

Results

A minimum of 6 months of radiologic and clinical follow-up was available for 146 (40 %) patients, including 16 with relaxing incisions. There were 66 (45 %) recurrent hernias detected on esophagram. There was no difference in the rate of recurrent hiatal hernia among the three groups: Primary closure of the hiatus (21/36 [58 %]), primary closure with biologic mesh reinforcement (36/94 [38 %]), and relaxing incision with biologic mesh reinforcement (9/16 [56 %]; p = 0.428). Two reoperations were performed on patients who underwent left relaxing incisions and developed symptomatic diaphragmatic hernias through the left relaxing incisions. There were no complications associated with use of biologic mesh at the hiatus.

Conclusions

Rate of recurrent hiatal hernia is similar between patients who undergo diaphragmatic relaxing incisions and patients who undergo primary hiatal closure. Relaxing incisions can be safely performed on either crus; however, biologic mesh should not be used to patch a left-sided relaxing incision due to the risk of developing a diaphragmatic hernia.

     

Mesh in laparoscopic large hiatal hernia repair: a systematic review of the literature

Background

The use of mesh is becoming more popular for large hiatal hernia (type II–IV) repair to reduce the recurrence rate. The aim of this study was to outline the currently available literature on the use of mesh in laparoscopic large hiatal hernia repair, emphasizing objective outcome.

Methods

A structured search of the literature was performed in the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases.

Results

A total of 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. There were three randomized controlled trials, seven prospective and five retrospective cohort studies, and five prospective and one retrospective case–control study. The study design was not reported in the remaining studies. In the included studies, laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair was performed with mesh in 924 patients (mesh group) and without mesh in 340 patients (nonmesh group). The type of mesh used was very different: polypropylene in six, biomesh in nine, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) in two, expanded PTFE (ePTFE) in two, and composite polypropylene–PTFE in another two. At least two different kinds of mesh were used in five studies. Radiological and/or endoscopic follow-up was performed after a mean (±SEM) period of 25.2 ± 4.0 months. There was no or only a small recurrence (recurrent hiatal hernia <2 cm) in 385 of the 451 available patients (85.4 %) in the mesh group and in 182 of 247 (73.7 %) in the nonmesh group.

Conclusions

The use of mesh in the repair of large hiatal hernias is promising with respect to the reduction of anatomical recurrences. However, many different kinds and configurations of mesh are available. This systematic review of the literature is a basis for high-quality randomized controlled trials to obtain the most effective and safe mesh in the long term.