ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018
Laparoscopic Hill repair: 25-year follow-up.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hill anti reflux procedure for gastro esophageal reflux disease after sleeve gastrectomy - a single center experience.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Impedance planimetry (EndoFLIPTM) and surgical outcomes after Hill compared to Toupet fundoplication.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- The Role of Real-Time Continuous High-Resolution Manometry During Bougie-Free Laparoscopic Hill Repair for the Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021Article
- Minimally invasive surgery for large hiatal hernia.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe open Hill repair for gastroesophageal reflux disease and hiatal hernia is remarkably durable, with a median 10-year reoperation rate of only 3% and satisfaction of 93%. No long-term data exist for the laparoscopic Hill repair (LHR).
methodsPatients who underwent primary LHR at Swedish Medical Center for reflux and/or hiatal hernia at least 5 years earlier (1992-2010) were identified from an IRB-approved database. There were 727 patients who met inclusion criteria, including 648 undergoing repair for reflux and 79 for paraesophageal hernia. Two questionnaires were administered via mail to evaluate long-term quality of life using validated GERD-HRQL, Swallowing score, and global satisfaction score. Outcomes were defined by GERD-HRQL score, Swallowing score, resumption of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, need for reoperation, and global satisfaction with overall results.
resultsTwo hundred forty-two patients completed and returned the survey (226 lost to follow-up, 90 deceased, 3 denied undergoing LHR, 166 non-responders), of which 52% were male. The average age at the time of surgery was 49.5 years. Median follow-up was 18.5 years (range 6.2-24.7). The average GERD-HRQL score (7.1) and the average Swallowing score (39.9) both indicated excellent symptomatic outcomes. 30% of patients are using daily PPIs. 24 patients (9.9%) required reoperation for failure during the follow-up period, 21 in the reflux group and 3 in the paraesophageal hernia group. Overall, 85% reported good to excellent results, and 76% would recommend the operation.
conclusionLHR shows excellent long-term durability and quality of life similar to the open Hill repair, with 85% good to excellent results at a median follow-up of 19 years and a reoperation rate under 10%. It is surmised that Hill suture fixation of the gastroesophageal junction to the preaortic fascia may confer unique structural integrity compared to other repairs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29602997What 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.