ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2021
Paraesophageal hernia: to fundoplicate or not?
Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Paraesophageal hernia repair combined with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass reduces short-term hernia recurrence with added metabolic benefit in patients with BMI ≥ 35: A 15-year experience.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- No advantage of fundoplication in paraesophageal hernia repair: a retrospective multicenter study.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2025Article
- Paraesophageal hernia recurrence following repair: making the case for reoperative surgery in a propensity-matched cohort.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- The outcome of hiatal hernia repair and factors associated with surgical outcome in the pediatric population: a single-center experience.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2023Article
- Resolution and recurrence of anemia following repair of paraesophageal hernias.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Commentary: Are we wrapping up the debate on repair of giant paraesophageal hernia?JTCVS techniques · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The need for an antireflux procedure during repair of a paraesophageal hernia (PEH) has been the subject of a long-standing controversy. With most centers now performing routine fundoplication during PEH repair, high-quality data on whether crural repair alone or using a mesh may provide adequate anti-reflux effect is still scarce. We sought to answer to the question: "Is fundoplication routinely needed during PEH repair?". Our endpoints were (I) rates of postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (either symptomatic or objectively assessed), (II) rates of recurrence, and (III) rates of postoperative dysphagia. We searched the MEDLINE, Cochrane, PubMed, and Embase databases for papers published between 1995 and 2019, selecting comparative cohort studies and only including papers reporting the rationale for performing or not performing fundoplication. Overall, nine papers were included for review. While four of the included studies recommended selective or no fundoplication, most of these data come from earlier retrospective studies. Higher-quality data from recent prospective studies including two randomized controlled trials recommended routine fundoplication, mostly due to a significantly lower incidence of postoperative GERD. However, only a relatively short follow-up of 12 months was presented, which we recognize as an important limitation. Fundoplication did not seem to result in reduced recurrence rates when compared to primary repair alone.
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.