Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33856379›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of surgery2022

Sutured Versus Mesh-augmented Hiatus Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Josipa Petric, Tim Bright, David S Liu, Melissa Wee Yun, David I Watson

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of crural reinforcement with bio-aHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. 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
  20. Trends in outcomes of 862 giant hiatus hernia repairs over 30 years.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Josipa PetricCollege of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, South Australia, Australia.
Tim BrightDepartment of Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, South Australia, Australia.
David S LiuDepartment of Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, South Australia, Australia.
Melissa Wee YunDepartment of Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, South Australia, Australia.
David I WatsonCollege of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, South Australia, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis meta-analysis systematically reviewed published randomized control trials comparing sutured versus mesh-augmented hiatus hernia (HH) repair. Our primary endpoint was HH recurrence at short- and long-term follow-up. Secondary endpoints were: surgical complications, operative times, dysphagia and quality of life. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Repair of large HHs is increasingly being performed. However, there is no consensus for the optimal technique for hiatal closure between sutured versus mesh-augmented (absorbable or nonabsorbable) repair.

methodsA systematic review of Medline, Scopus (which encompassed Embase), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and PubMed was performed to identify relevant studies comparing mesh-augmented versus sutured HH repair. Data were extracted and compared by meta-analysis, using odds ratio and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals.

resultsSeven randomized control trials were found which compared mesh-augmented (nonabsorbable mesh: n = 296; absorbable mesh: n = 92) with sutured repair (n = 347). There were no significant differences for short-term hernia recurrence (defined as 6-12 months, 10.1% mesh vs 15.5% sutured, P = 0.22), long-term hernia recurrence (defined as 3-5 years, 30.7% mesh vs 31.3% sutured, P = 0.69), functional outcomes and patient satisfaction. The only statistically significant difference was that the mesh repair required a longer operation time (P = 0.05, OR 2.33, 95% confidence interval 0.03-24.69).

conclusionsMesh repair for HH does not offer any advantage over sutured hiatal closure. As both techniques deliver good and comparable clinical outcomes, a suture only technique is still an appropriate approach.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurgical MeshSuturesHernia, HiatalHerniorrhaphyHumansLaparoscopyProsthesis DesignSuture Techniques

Identifiers

PMID33856379

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.