Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28550394›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2017

Laparoscopic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair: Utilization Rates of Mesh in the USA and Short-Term Outcome Analysis.

Francisco Schlottmann, Paula D Strassle, Marco G Patti

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of crural reinforcement with bio-aHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Medium-term safety and efficacy profile of paraesophageal hernia repair with Phasix-STHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022
    Observational
  9. Management of paraesophageal hernia review of clinical studies: timing to surgery, mesh use, fundoplication, gastropexy and other controversies.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Francisco SchlottmannDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 4030 Burnett Womack Building, 101 Manning Drive, CB 7081, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7081, USA. fschlottmann@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3565-0559
Paula D StrassleDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 4030 Burnett Womack Building, 101 Manning Drive, CB 7081, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7081, USA.
Marco G PattiDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 4030 Burnett Womack Building, 101 Manning Drive, CB 7081, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7081, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany studies have shown that the utilization of mesh for paraesophageal hernia repair (PEHR) does not prevent recurrence. The aims of this study were (a) to assess the utilization of mesh for PEHR in the USA and (b) to compare the perioperative outcomes between PEHR with and without mesh.

methodsA retrospective population-based analysis was performed using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Adult patients who underwent laparoscopic PEHR with and without implantation of mesh between 2011 and 2014 were included. The yearly utilization of mesh, stratified by surgical approach, was estimated using the Poisson regression. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the effect of mesh on 30-day perioperative outcomes.

resultsA total of 9590 laparoscopic PEHR were included, 5814 (60.6%) without mesh and 3776 (39.4%) with mesh. The yearly rate of PEHR with implantation of mesh did not change significantly during the study period (39.4% mesh utilization in 2011, and 38.2% mesh utilization in 2014, p = 0.37). Patients undergoing PEHR with mesh, as compared to those without mesh, had similar incidence of 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality.

conclusionEven though there is no strong evidence to support its use, utilization rates of mesh for laparoscopic PEHR remained high and stable between 2011 and 2014 in the USA. The use of mesh was not associated with a higher incidence of postoperative complications.

Indexed as

AgedDatabases, FactualFemaleHernia, HiatalHerniorrhaphyHumansIncidenceLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesSurgical MeshTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesMeshParaesophageal herniaParaesophageal hernia repair

Identifiers

PMID28550394

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.