ArticleWorld journal of surgery2011
Evolution and development of surgery for large paraesophageal hiatus hernia.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Percentage of intrathoracic stomach predicts operative and post-operative morbidity, persistent reflux and PPI requirement following laparoscopic hiatus hernia repair and fundoplication.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Contemporary management of paraesophaegeal hernias: establishing a European expert consensus.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Article
- Laparoscopic repair of paraesophageal hernia with anterior gastropexy: a multicenter study.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Article
- A collective review of biological versus synthetic mesh-reinforced cruroplasty during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication.Journal of minimal access surgeryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laparoscopic repair is the standard surgical approach to the problem of large paraesophageal hiatus hernia. It is associated with low risks of morbidity and mortality, although there is a small risk (less than 5%) of a clinically significant recurrent hernia. Various techniques have been proposed to minimise this risk, including esophageal lengthening procedures and mesh reinforcement of the hiatus. Both remain controversial. Radiological outcomes from randomised trials suggest that a reduction in hernia recurrence rates can be achieved with the use of mesh repair, although these trials have not demonstrated any clinically significant benefits for mesh repair. The risk of complications following mesh placement at the esophageal hiatus or an esophageal lengthening procedure needs to be balanced against potential benefits. More work is required to define the optimal approach to repair of large paraesophageal hiatus hernias.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.