Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28733735›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018

Laparoscopic repair of giant paraesophageal hernia: are there factors associated with anatomic recurrence?

Michael Antiporda, Benjamin Veenstra, Chloe Jackson, Pujan Kandel, C Daniel Smith, Steven P Bowers

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Recurrence in Paraesophageal Hernia: Patient Factors and Composite Surgical Repair in 862 Cases.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023
    Article
  7. Trends in outcomes of 862 giant hiatus hernia repairs over 30 years.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Predictors of Hiatal Hernia Recurrence After Laparoscopic Anti-reflux Surgery with Hiatal Hernia Repair: a Prospective Database Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2019
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Michael AntipordaDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic in Florida, Davis 3 North, 4500 San Pablo Road, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA.
Benjamin VeenstraDepartment of Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Chloe JacksonDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic in Florida, Davis 3 North, 4500 San Pablo Road, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA.
Pujan KandelDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic in Florida, Davis 3 North, 4500 San Pablo Road, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA.
C Daniel SmithPiedmont Hospital, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Steven P BowersDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic in Florida, Davis 3 North, 4500 San Pablo Road, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA. bowers.steven@mayo.edu.
Mayo Clinic in Florida · USPiedmont Atlanta Hospital · USRush University Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRepair of giant paraesophageal hernia (PEH) is associated with a favorably high rate of symptom improvement; however, rates of recurrence by objective measures remain high. Herein we analyze our experience with laparoscopic giant PEH repair to determine what factors if any can predict anatomic recurrence.

methodsWe prospectively collected data on PEH characteristics, variations in operative techniques, and surgeon factors for 595 patients undergoing laparoscopic PEH repair from 2008 to 2015. Upper GI study was performed at 6 months postoperatively and selectively thereafter-any supra-diaphragmatic stomach was considered hiatal hernia recurrence. Exclusion criteria included revisional operation (22.4%), size <5 cm (17.6%), inadequate follow-up (17.8%), and confounding concurrent operations (6.9%). Inclusion criteria were met by 202 patients (31% male, median age 71 years, and median BMI 28.7).

resultsAt a median follow-up of 6 months (IQR 6-12), overall anatomic recurrence rate was 34.2%. Symptom recurrence rate was 9.9% and revisional operation was required in ten patients (4.9%). Neither patient demographics nor PEH characteristics (size, presence of Cameron erosions, esophagitis, or Barrett's) correlated with anatomic recurrence. Technical factors at operation (mobilized intra-abdominal length of esophagus, Collis gastroplasty, number of anterior/posterior stitches, use of crural buttress, use of pledgeted or mattress sutures, or gastrostomy) were also not correlated with recurrence. Regarding surgeon factors, annual volume of fewer than ten cases per year was associated with increased risk of anatomic failure (54 vs 33%, P = 0.02). Multivariate analysis identified surgeon experience (<10 cases per year) as an independent factor associated with early hiatal hernia recurrence (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.34-10.9).

conclusionsLaparoscopic repair of giant PEH is associated with high anatomic recurrence rate but excellent symptom control. PEH characteristics and technical operative variables do not appear to significantly affect rates of recurrence. In contrast, surgeon volume does appear to contribute significantly to durability of repair.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHernia, HiatalHerniorrhaphyHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopyOutcomesParaesophageal hernia repairRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID28733735
OpenAlexW2738957904

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.